I think it goes a little deeper, he assured his voters that if elected, he'd appoint conservative judges who share their views. I can't imagine he'd appoint anyone who's contrary to his own views, and would we want a politician who'd pander to something he disagrees with?
From the article:
The firm, says ONI, responded by saying it doesn't sell software directly to end-users. ONI challenges Fortinet's claim, pointing to a 2004 article, reachable online, by the official New Light of Myanmar newspaper. The story covers a ceremony bringing together Burma's prime minister and Benjamin Teh, described as "an official representative of Fortinet." "Given Mr. Teh's participation, it seems unlikely that Fortinet did not know of the sale of its software to Burma," notes the ONI report. Anyway, How is it illegal to export this software to Iran but not Burma?
That 8% figure is the number of new PCs sold, not the number existing and in use today. The iMac was a bestseller etc. and I've heard their penetration is over 20%. Apple's laptop sales alone are 17.6% of the market
The framers realized such a threat, and made it illegal. According to Article 1, Section 6 of the US Constitution:
They [members of Congress] shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place. Now this wasn't intended to allow drunk drivers to avoid arrest "I'm on my way to a vote in Congress" or lawyers for Larry Craig to say he "was returning home for a vote and shouldn't have been arrested" etc.
The iPod has DRM-less storage. It plays mp3s and aacs, and even the iTunes store offers DRMless files. The iPods allow use as a storage, its only the iPhone and iTouch that dont explicitly allow it, though software does.
This has got to be some very sturdy equipment. Ever watched a cockpit video of liftoff? Those are some heavy and prolonged vibrations. Think the vibrational sensors will still work to detect such subtle vibrations later after that much shaking for such a long time?
I didn't say that the scammers weren't the ones responsible for the DDOS attack, and they're likely the culprits.
I meant that swatting at a gadfly doesn't necessarily mean the gadfly is really successful at hurting their target. Could we see some evidence that the number of scams is going down, or that 419eater.com is causing a remarkable drop? The fact that they're DDoSed doesn't mean that they're anything more than a nuisance, maybe the perpetrators are going for a symbolic strike against a weak opponent for all we know.
Although I hate it for the owners and admins of the above sites, I think it shows without a doubt that their efforts to 'get back' at the scammers are working.
By that logic, does all the hate mail Fred Phelps get mean that he's on the right track? Does it mean that all those protesting Bush's speeches validate his argument? Odd way for the author to phrase it. I don't think there's a cause and effect here. They might be publicly opposed to the spamming and phishing scams, but they fact that they're getting attacked doesn't necessarily mean they're making more than a dent in it.
Once I got to "Hollywood limousine liberals" in the article, my eyes started to glaze over. The blogger is like The Rude Pundit, only not being as sarcastic.
To the merits of the discussion: Hollywood does not like to get too mired in political controversies. Show me a pro-Palestine movie from Hollywood. They may be socially liberal, but know that certain things won't make them money and will only bring trouble. Still, they support the troops, and get outraged when someone tries to blame the troops. Maybe the fact that the troops have changed in demographics, becoming more black and hispanic and female, means that the G.I. Joe is no longer that representative?
Facebook's terms of Service state that you cannot host a group that attacks a specific facebook member, has pornographic images, or attacks a specific religion or group. I agree with what Facebook is doing.
If you're so bent out of shape, start your own social networking service, or go troll wikipedia.
"CURRRENTLY" in Iraq. Saddam Hussein did not want them in Iraq, they posed a threat to his secular dictatorship.
Al Qaeda is a very small minority in Iraq. >80% of the insurgency is Sunni Arabs, and the Shiites like the Sadr movement make up most of the rest. Something like 7% of the insurgents are allegedly "in league" with Al Qaeda, lke Zarqawi's miniscule group, and I doubt they have Bin Laden's phone number. If the US left, the Sunni Arabs would wipe out the Al Qaeda element, who they despise. The Shiites also hate Al Qaeda even more.
Maybe they're thinking of the Bush administration's claims about a link (Condi Rice said that Iraq was connected to what happened on 9/11), even Bill O'Reilly tried to spin the 9/11 Commission's report and say there was a link.
If you bought an iPhone for $600, then you probably felt it was worth it, right? So you got your iPhone and are satisfied. Yes, it sucks to think "if I only waited 2 months" but think about it this way; you paid $200 for two months of iPhone use and the privilege of being an early adopter, the first guy in town with one.
Nope. If you read Martin Lings' biography on him, you'll see he was no more violent than Moses, and spoke about peace like Jesus, peace be upon them all.
Would a warlord order his followers not to fight back and just endure the oppression, for 14 years? He was not a thief either, the people of Mecca used to raid his caravans for years, until one day God made it permissible to fight back in retaliation, but within limits (no killing civilians etc). He was more fair than anyone of his time, or even today in war. Murderer? Only one single person died by his hand during the battle, and it was in self-defense against a man attempting to assassinate him. He felt sorry for the man the rest of his life.
Quit assuming that since terrorists are so bad, the religion itself is. They're a minority who don't speak for Islam.
I think you misunderstood me. I said "The Native Americans suffered the worst of their indignities centuries ago," in comparison to today. I was thinking trail of tears when I wrote it, and of course Native Americans are still suffering. I hope you don't think I implied they're prospering, because I don't think that to be the case for everyone. I was using their example to make a point, not show their successes. I'm actually quite good friends with a few native americans, and I know they don't have it all roses.
Slashdot Mirror
I think it goes a little deeper, he assured his voters that if elected, he'd appoint conservative judges who share their views. I can't imagine he'd appoint anyone who's contrary to his own views, and would we want a politician who'd pander to something he disagrees with?
Why don't we try to destroy tropical cyclones by nuking them?
Act Now to Stop War and End Racism?
Pretty clear title, what's the problem with them?
Ah, a variation on the good old "we can neither confirm nor deny" Glomar Response
SHATNER IS KIRK
Slides in pdf are just a cry for help. They'll never scroll or look as good as powerpoints, sadly.
The iPod has DRM-less storage. It plays mp3s and aacs, and even the iTunes store offers DRMless files. The iPods allow use as a storage, its only the iPhone and iTouch that dont explicitly allow it, though software does.
This has got to be some very sturdy equipment. Ever watched a cockpit video of liftoff? Those are some heavy and prolonged vibrations. Think the vibrational sensors will still work to detect such subtle vibrations later after that much shaking for such a long time?
"People who are really serious about software should make their own hardware."
--Alan Kay
I didn't say that the scammers weren't the ones responsible for the DDOS attack, and they're likely the culprits.
I meant that swatting at a gadfly doesn't necessarily mean the gadfly is really successful at hurting their target. Could we see some evidence that the number of scams is going down, or that 419eater.com is causing a remarkable drop? The fact that they're DDoSed doesn't mean that they're anything more than a nuisance, maybe the perpetrators are going for a symbolic strike against a weak opponent for all we know.
Although I hate it for the owners and admins of the above sites, I think it shows without a doubt that their efforts to 'get back' at the scammers are working.
By that logic, does all the hate mail Fred Phelps get mean that he's on the right track?
Does it mean that all those protesting Bush's speeches validate his argument?
Odd way for the author to phrase it. I don't think there's a cause and effect here. They might be publicly opposed to the spamming and phishing scams, but they fact that they're getting attacked doesn't necessarily mean they're making more than a dent in it.
It's source is a Fox News piece. You remember them, they're the ones who claimed beloved children's television host "Mr Rogers destroyed an entire generation of children's lives."
Once I got to "Hollywood limousine liberals" in the article, my eyes started to glaze over. The blogger is like The Rude Pundit, only not being as sarcastic.
To the merits of the discussion: Hollywood does not like to get too mired in political controversies. Show me a pro-Palestine movie from Hollywood. They may be socially liberal, but know that certain things won't make them money and will only bring trouble. Still, they support the troops, and get outraged when someone tries to blame the troops. Maybe the fact that the troops have changed in demographics, becoming more black and hispanic and female, means that the G.I. Joe is no longer that representative?
Was referring to grandparent, I don't want a double standard either.
Facebook's terms of Service state that you cannot host a group that attacks a specific facebook member, has pornographic images, or attacks a specific religion or group. I agree with what Facebook is doing.
If you're so bent out of shape, start your own social networking service, or go troll wikipedia.
"CURRRENTLY" in Iraq. Saddam Hussein did not want them in Iraq, they posed a threat to his secular dictatorship.
Al Qaeda is a very small minority in Iraq. >80% of the insurgency is Sunni Arabs, and the Shiites like the Sadr movement make up most of the rest. Something like 7% of the insurgents are allegedly "in league" with Al Qaeda, lke Zarqawi's miniscule group, and I doubt they have Bin Laden's phone number. If the US left, the Sunni Arabs would wipe out the Al Qaeda element, who they despise. The Shiites also hate Al Qaeda even more.
There are hawks who insist that Saddam Hussein had a relationship with Al Qaeda.
Stephen Hayes argued passionately about it during the Aug 24th episode of Real Time with Bill Maher.
Maybe they're thinking of the Bush administration's claims about a link (Condi Rice said that Iraq was connected to what happened on 9/11), even Bill O'Reilly tried to spin the 9/11 Commission's report and say there was a link.
If you bought an iPhone for $600, then you probably felt it was worth it, right? So you got your iPhone and are satisfied. Yes, it sucks to think "if I only waited 2 months" but think about it this way; you paid $200 for two months of iPhone use and the privilege of being an early adopter, the first guy in town with one.
You'd get a treo?
Nope. If you read Martin Lings' biography on him, you'll see he was no more violent than Moses, and spoke about peace like Jesus, peace be upon them all.
Would a warlord order his followers not to fight back and just endure the oppression, for 14 years? He was not a thief either, the people of Mecca used to raid his caravans for years, until one day God made it permissible to fight back in retaliation, but within limits (no killing civilians etc). He was more fair than anyone of his time, or even today in war. Murderer? Only one single person died by his hand during the battle, and it was in self-defense against a man attempting to assassinate him. He felt sorry for the man the rest of his life.
Quit assuming that since terrorists are so bad, the religion itself is. They're a minority who don't speak for Islam.
I think you misunderstood me. I said "The Native Americans suffered the worst of their indignities centuries ago," in comparison to today. I was thinking trail of tears when I wrote it, and of course Native Americans are still suffering. I hope you don't think I implied they're prospering, because I don't think that to be the case for everyone. I was using their example to make a point, not show their successes. I'm actually quite good friends with a few native americans, and I know they don't have it all roses.