That's right. If I remember correctly, there weren't any cars built in Hungary from the 1950's on. Though there is a brand of trailor trucks, if I remember correctly.
Jo Estet Kivanok! Sorry, can't figure out the accents or remember my spelling very well.
It's not Hungarian, it's East German. They made them from the 1950's until at least 1989. Basically the same model. 2 stroke engine, you had to get a special mixture to drive it. The exterior was made of plastic with a sawdust core. Getting it up to the speed limit was a challenge.
And yes, there were lots in Hungary in 1989 when I was there, because they were so damn cheap. I was back in May of last year, and the air has improved significantly, though it's still bad. I believe the improvement is largely because they Traubies (as they were called) have either been incentivized out by the government, or just plain collapsed. I didn't see a single one.
In January of 1990, when I went to Bucharest Romania after the revolution, I stumbled on an empty lot where they had hauled cars burned out in the fighting. There were a couple there that took me a minute to identify, and then I realized they were Trabants, because there was basically only a bare frame. You didn't want to get in an accident in that one, let me tell you.
The Polski Fiats were also another great/horrible Eastern European car. Fiat styling, Polish engineering. Shudder. Cute and zippy though. Popular with taxis in Budapest at the time.
Your original statement was "Corruption is proportional to the size of government". Let me rephrase my statement then. Are you saying that without government, there is not corruption? If it is proportional to the size of government, it's pretty logical to assume that no government means no corrpution. But as you pointed out in your follow-up, that's not true. So do you no longer stand by your original statement?
"Perfected? I don't recall people close to a Republican president finding themselves suicided."
Huh. And the proof that it wasn't just a suicide is? Beyond speculation and conspiracy theories here, really, what is the proof? If we're talking conspiracy theories, how about two Democratic candidates for Senate in the same state being killed in plane crashes within two years of each other, an occurance otherwise incredibly rare.
"I have not heard of a poll being kept open in Chicago to ensure a Republican President had sufficient electoral votes to be elected."
A reference to the JFK election? That's one of those urban legends. While it's true that the polls were kept open to ensure JFK took the state, he had enough electoral votes to win without Illinois. Here's a page on electoral legends: http://www.snopes.com/history/govern/onevote.htm
"In my home state of Arkansas, I've not heard of the Republicans filing a last minute law suit before a court to ensure that certain polling areas were kept open after they were supposed to be closed. (This last number was perpetuated in Pulaski County, AR by the Dems because they alleged the polls weren't opened long enough, although a law is on the books that says that if people are in line to vote, the polls remain open for them to vote. Those that were informed to remain open were in heavily Democrat areas.)"
Interesting, I never heard that one. That is an issue of corruption.
What part of "In one, you break a law and are willing to face the consequences..." was unclear in the post you responded to?
No one on the Republican side took the memos and then gave them publically to Novak. Instead, they held them and leaked them at opportune times and try to dodge behind the "it's not illegal because of a computer glitch" excuse.
First of all, no they didn't. Re-read the article. It's the Republicans who are claiming the they aren't owned by anyone. As for the Democrats: "Against that backdrop, both sides have something to gain and lose from the investigation into the computer files. For Democrats, the scandal highlights GOP dirty tricks that could result in ethics complaints to the Senate and the Washington Bar -- or even criminal charges under computer intrusion laws."
Second of all, the documents weren't accessible, newly created accounts were accessible without a password, meaning that the Republicans were TRYING to log in as Democrats, and that way gained access to the files.
On the other hand, you have a good point that our reps should get back to governing and stop strategizing so much. But that goes to both sides. I think what you'd find is that nothing of that sort would be written down again.
At the end of the 19th century, large corporations controlling oil and railroads were able to exploit the fact that there was no law without government assistance. They were able to create monopolies and exploit them to screw over customers. Are you arguing that corporations, in the absence of law, are unable to behave in this fashion?
Actually, the original poster didn't say anything re: the Witnesses. He said:
"LOL now you are funny, can just imagine McBride going door to door selling licenses and preaching the word:D"
Which is actually something Mormons do as well, in reference to an earlier post suggesting McBride is a Mormon.
Therefore your friends need not take offense, and you need not take umbridge on their part.
Ah yes, the storm troopers of the Boy Scouts of America will be coming to your doors, seeking Linux products and homosexuals to expel from their ranks.
I agree with out, it's really a question of users. And the larger the install base, the higher number of users who are less trained or who go through a bootcamp to get some form of certification that tells them all to do exactly the same thing.
And the larger the install base, the bigger the thrill the cracker gets for attacking something on it.
To quote Dilbert. I wonder if they'll make these things PC Compatible? The Xbox I got free for signing up with Speakeasy goes unused except when I have a LAN party, and one person has to swap out of a game (or doesn't want to play it).
Good point. It's hard to know. My suspicion is that in the corporate world, at least, large venders like Dell will make deals with some of the larger Linux companies to create the OS's for their systems. I believe, and again it's hard to know for sure, that we'll likely see a few distros gain a plurality. Again, less vulnerable than a Windows monopoly. But still a potential danger.
That's definitely true. However, if we see a few larger companies dominate, not an unreasonable assumption, you could see attacks tailored to those companies' boxen. Not to say that Linux will suddenly become more vulnerable than Windows, but unless security practices dictate customizing every box, networks running Linux will become more vulnerable in general.
From the article: "Geer acknowledges that point but said better planning--as well as forcing Microsoft to allow competitors to interoperate with key operating system components--could mitigate both issues."
If we do that, aren't we opening up these key operating system compenents as points of failure across OS's? I thought diversity was the point they were making. This sounds like an arguement against doing that.
As Linux gets more powerful, however, you're more likely to see turn-key solutions, out of box servers that have little or no modification by vender. That's when you'll see the real danger from attacks.
Not on this one. First of all, wait until they're really advanced and give you lots of cool features. Don't be stuck with the equivalent of an AT in your brain that can't be taken out. I think I'd rather be the 1 millionth customer than that 1 hundredth, or even one thousandth customer.
I've done it many times. [Stolen from Mark Twain]
Seriously, though, I have. I'll tell you the easiest thing to do is to taper. Diet Pepsi is my drug of choice (gets me moderated down I'll bet). I just cut the dosage in half each day, or if I'm not feeling adventurish, every other day. I feel a little on edge, but not too bad when I do that, no serious headaches. And I find that I am more awake in the morngins and my sleep is more restful.
Usually, though, I get a sinus infection a couple of months later and have to start drinking again to keep working effectively.
Indeed. Given the details of the story, they have a fairly elaborate set-up going, with at least some access to large houses, and a number of people who can at least pose as, and probably are armed guards.
Slashdot Mirror
At least when it comes to Perl.
Shhhh! Don't meantion the abortion issue. You might as well have brought up Nazis...Oh damn
I agree, the original joke wasn't even funny, which makes the joke based on it not funny.
That's right. If I remember correctly, there weren't any cars built in Hungary from the 1950's on. Though there is a brand of trailor trucks, if I remember correctly. Jo Estet Kivanok! Sorry, can't figure out the accents or remember my spelling very well.
It's not Hungarian, it's East German. They made them from the 1950's until at least 1989. Basically the same model. 2 stroke engine, you had to get a special mixture to drive it. The exterior was made of plastic with a sawdust core. Getting it up to the speed limit was a challenge. And yes, there were lots in Hungary in 1989 when I was there, because they were so damn cheap. I was back in May of last year, and the air has improved significantly, though it's still bad. I believe the improvement is largely because they Traubies (as they were called) have either been incentivized out by the government, or just plain collapsed. I didn't see a single one. In January of 1990, when I went to Bucharest Romania after the revolution, I stumbled on an empty lot where they had hauled cars burned out in the fighting. There were a couple there that took me a minute to identify, and then I realized they were Trabants, because there was basically only a bare frame. You didn't want to get in an accident in that one, let me tell you. The Polski Fiats were also another great/horrible Eastern European car. Fiat styling, Polish engineering. Shudder. Cute and zippy though. Popular with taxis in Budapest at the time.
Your original statement was "Corruption is proportional to the size of government". Let me rephrase my statement then. Are you saying that without government, there is not corruption? If it is proportional to the size of government, it's pretty logical to assume that no government means no corrpution. But as you pointed out in your follow-up, that's not true. So do you no longer stand by your original statement?
"Perfected? I don't recall people close to a Republican president finding themselves suicided." Huh. And the proof that it wasn't just a suicide is? Beyond speculation and conspiracy theories here, really, what is the proof? If we're talking conspiracy theories, how about two Democratic candidates for Senate in the same state being killed in plane crashes within two years of each other, an occurance otherwise incredibly rare. "I have not heard of a poll being kept open in Chicago to ensure a Republican President had sufficient electoral votes to be elected." A reference to the JFK election? That's one of those urban legends. While it's true that the polls were kept open to ensure JFK took the state, he had enough electoral votes to win without Illinois. Here's a page on electoral legends: http://www.snopes.com/history/govern/onevote.htm "In my home state of Arkansas, I've not heard of the Republicans filing a last minute law suit before a court to ensure that certain polling areas were kept open after they were supposed to be closed. (This last number was perpetuated in Pulaski County, AR by the Dems because they alleged the polls weren't opened long enough, although a law is on the books that says that if people are in line to vote, the polls remain open for them to vote. Those that were informed to remain open were in heavily Democrat areas.)" Interesting, I never heard that one. That is an issue of corruption.
What part of "In one, you break a law and are willing to face the consequences..." was unclear in the post you responded to? No one on the Republican side took the memos and then gave them publically to Novak. Instead, they held them and leaked them at opportune times and try to dodge behind the "it's not illegal because of a computer glitch" excuse.
First of all, no they didn't. Re-read the article. It's the Republicans who are claiming the they aren't owned by anyone. As for the Democrats: "Against that backdrop, both sides have something to gain and lose from the investigation into the computer files. For Democrats, the scandal highlights GOP dirty tricks that could result in ethics complaints to the Senate and the Washington Bar -- or even criminal charges under computer intrusion laws." Second of all, the documents weren't accessible, newly created accounts were accessible without a password, meaning that the Republicans were TRYING to log in as Democrats, and that way gained access to the files. On the other hand, you have a good point that our reps should get back to governing and stop strategizing so much. But that goes to both sides. I think what you'd find is that nothing of that sort would be written down again.
No, no, the passwords were set to: Democrats: Corporations99People1 Republicans:Corporations110People0
At the end of the 19th century, large corporations controlling oil and railroads were able to exploit the fact that there was no law without government assistance. They were able to create monopolies and exploit them to screw over customers. Are you arguing that corporations, in the absence of law, are unable to behave in this fashion?
I see. So organizations besides government can't be corrupt? Don't be silly.
Actually, the original poster didn't say anything re: the Witnesses. He said: "LOL now you are funny, can just imagine McBride going door to door selling licenses and preaching the word :D"
Which is actually something Mormons do as well, in reference to an earlier post suggesting McBride is a Mormon.
Therefore your friends need not take offense, and you need not take umbridge on their part.
Ah yes, the storm troopers of the Boy Scouts of America will be coming to your doors, seeking Linux products and homosexuals to expel from their ranks.
I agree with out, it's really a question of users. And the larger the install base, the higher number of users who are less trained or who go through a bootcamp to get some form of certification that tells them all to do exactly the same thing. And the larger the install base, the bigger the thrill the cracker gets for attacking something on it.
To quote Dilbert. I wonder if they'll make these things PC Compatible? The Xbox I got free for signing up with Speakeasy goes unused except when I have a LAN party, and one person has to swap out of a game (or doesn't want to play it).
Good point. It's hard to know. My suspicion is that in the corporate world, at least, large venders like Dell will make deals with some of the larger Linux companies to create the OS's for their systems. I believe, and again it's hard to know for sure, that we'll likely see a few distros gain a plurality. Again, less vulnerable than a Windows monopoly. But still a potential danger.
That's definitely true. However, if we see a few larger companies dominate, not an unreasonable assumption, you could see attacks tailored to those companies' boxen. Not to say that Linux will suddenly become more vulnerable than Windows, but unless security practices dictate customizing every box, networks running Linux will become more vulnerable in general.
From the article: "Geer acknowledges that point but said better planning--as well as forcing Microsoft to allow competitors to interoperate with key operating system components--could mitigate both issues." If we do that, aren't we opening up these key operating system compenents as points of failure across OS's? I thought diversity was the point they were making. This sounds like an arguement against doing that.
As Linux gets more powerful, however, you're more likely to see turn-key solutions, out of box servers that have little or no modification by vender. That's when you'll see the real danger from attacks.
Not on this one. First of all, wait until they're really advanced and give you lots of cool features. Don't be stuck with the equivalent of an AT in your brain that can't be taken out. I think I'd rather be the 1 millionth customer than that 1 hundredth, or even one thousandth customer.
As long as they are a member of a well-regulated militia.
I've done it many times. [Stolen from Mark Twain] Seriously, though, I have. I'll tell you the easiest thing to do is to taper. Diet Pepsi is my drug of choice (gets me moderated down I'll bet). I just cut the dosage in half each day, or if I'm not feeling adventurish, every other day. I feel a little on edge, but not too bad when I do that, no serious headaches. And I find that I am more awake in the morngins and my sleep is more restful. Usually, though, I get a sinus infection a couple of months later and have to start drinking again to keep working effectively.
I find that baseball bats take care of homophobes really well. Oh wait, you meant in trade...
Indeed. Given the details of the story, they have a fairly elaborate set-up going, with at least some access to large houses, and a number of people who can at least pose as, and probably are armed guards.