You say your squatter shack was a fine place to grow up? Would you be willing to force homeless people to live in it (In NYC during winter months, the police are empowered to remove homeless people from the streets and forcibly place them in shelters)? Would you go back to live in it yourself? Would you let your kids live in it? How would you feel if you forced someone to live there and they died because of substandard safety?
I'm not going to attempt to respond to this. This is worse then anecdotal. You might have read the book, this story might be from the book, you've no idea why anyone involved in the possible story is doing anything they're doing and you've no idea whether you've left anything out of importance.
So in other words either
a) You didn't actually read the book you were promoting or
b) You did read the book which was so unmemorable that you had to go to Amazon.com and grab the pull quote.
when you posted it. In fact, it stuck out in your mind enough that it's the only one you could recall.
If the book has better examples, stunners, find the book and post them. I'll check back later. For now, I'll stay deeply suspicious of anyone trumpeting "common sense".
Whenever anyone starts spouting about "common sense", I know that that is very far from what is being discussed.
Your little story is predicated on the notion that because this was nuns and a charity, the city should have waived the safety code requirements and just let them use it as a shelter. That that would be better for the homeless. That being in the waived shelter is better then the street.
And if the shelter burned down, trapping everyone inside because it didn't have sprinklers/fire doors/exit lights, if it collapsed because it was structurally unsound, if it exposed everyone inside to asbestos/flaking lead paint/rat feces/mercury/etc, what then? Do you still think they'd be better off?
Giving someone the thumbs up to put people in a dangerous situation in the name of charity isn't common sense. It's a recipe for disaster. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
You state that the anti-sodomy law was on the books but not enforced in Lawrence.This is completely wrong. While rare, it was enforced specifically in this case. The police were called to an apartment (based on false claim by a disgruntled neighbor who was later prosecuted for it) and walked in (the door wasn't locked) to find the two guys. They WERE arrested and WERE prosecuted. Though the conviction was a misdemeanor, it had legal repurcussions that neither felt they deserved. The police chose to arrest them, the prosecutor chose to prosecute the case.
I have to admit, I hadn't thought about the issue from the perspective of the visually impaired until reading this.
Has anyone here worked on any alternatives? The report indicates that the Microsoft sound-based alternative was totally non-functional. Is that even a worthwhile path to work on?
Perhaps some sort of text challenge/response scenario that would require an explicit understanding of the challenge part: "Take the second-to-last letter of each word from the below text, reverse the order and write them capitalized" . With a wide enough range of such challenges, spambots would be out of luck.
The majority opinion written by Kennedy specifically threw out Bowers. And since the ruling is an extension of the Right To Privacy, it also applies to hetero/homosexual anti-sodomy laws.
overturn Bowers v. Hardwick (the 1986 ruling upholding anti-sodomy laws) and since the effects of this ruling allow judges to a) capriciously decide cases and b)protect corporations by excluding "controversial" research that indicates their malfeasance, I'm not holding my breath for a reversal anytime soon.
While the strength inherent in the mithril is a component in resisting spear thrusts, it is in fact the Elfish magic that the armor has been imbued with that absorbs and dissipates the force of the blow. This is also the major factor in the delicious nature of Keebler cookies, which are also Elfish.
I knew I read this months ago. And "The Nation" specifically says that they got the story from Ha'aretz, noting that the US news media hadn't picked up on the story. Other then some additional commentary, this is a repeat.
Nobody with bad intent has ever been able to figure out how to fake a fax. I mean, law enforcement letterhead is more secure then nuclear launch codes.
I'm sleeping easier now.
Handy Microsoft Dictionary Entries
on
Bill Gates On Linux
·
· Score: 3, Funny
Innovate: Wait until someone develops something. Create inferior replication, use monopoly power and define as "part of the system" to crush original.
Feature: Bug
Compete: Use cash reserves/FUD/monopoly power to undercut superior products from other companies. When they are no longer viable, triple the price and then triple it again.
The paranoia is completely justified
on
RFID Explained
·
· Score: 1
You'd notice if someone bar code scanned your shoes, tires, pants, money, body. You're able to remove the bar codes from the items you purchase after you pay for them.
You can be RFID tracked anytime, anywhere, without your knowledge. Your location/possessions can be itemized/tracked/databased. Sounds like reasonable grounds for paranoia to me. Excuse me while I put back on my tin foil suit.
Am I expected to place my ..
on
RFID Explained
·
· Score: 4, Funny
shoes, pants, tires, body in shields whenever I leave my house? After the doctors spent all that time convincing me to take off the tin foil suit, you're telling me to put it back on?
Do MS programmers get extra options if they release products with buffer overflows? It seems like every third security flaw is caused by buffer overflows.
The original decision was made because Microsoft, the civilly recognized Monopolists, used their monopolistic powers to attempt to destroy the Java market.
Because the original judge correctly recognized that a) Sun would probably win on the merits and b) waiting for the end of the trial would probably make the issues moot (see IE vs. Netscape), he ordered that Microsoft had to include Sun's version of Java with their OS.
But this particular appeals court tends to be very pro-business (especially businesses that have contributed heavily to the Republican party) and ignored the issues. And since what's good for Microsoft is good for our troops, siding with Sun would mean the terrorists had won.
What they say: We support our armed forces and want them to be strong and technologically advanced
What they do: Lock the Army into a sweetheart contract that drains resources and supplies them with the most hackable, insecure, bloated OS available bar none.
The article suggests that Verizon is making this 180 degree turn because they saw that portability was on track to win and didn't want to be seen like a sore loser. While I would love to think that a large corporation would stop fighting for something selfish when they recognized that they would most likely lose, I've had few experiences of this nature.
Which leads me to question: Is Verizon just recognizing the situation was hopeless and acting responsibly/accordingly, or are they disarming their enemies only to lobby at the last minute for something (exhorbitant fees, special restrictions) and getting it passed while everyone else is fumbling? Or are they using their switch to gain some advantage over their wireless competitors(2. ??? 3. Profit)?
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly they have wonky eyes, the left eye is always much larger than the right.
If they're going to throw technical jargon like that at us, I'll be completely lost.
That was one of my favorite Deborah Gibson songs.
doesn't it become Guillon?
is equivalent to the error level in post-release commercial web serving software. Sounds like an endorsement to me.
You say your squatter shack was a fine place to grow up? Would you be willing to force homeless people to live in it (In NYC during winter months, the police are empowered to remove homeless people from the streets and forcibly place them in shelters)? Would you go back to live in it yourself? Would you let your kids live in it? How would you feel if you forced someone to live there and they died because of substandard safety?
I'm not going to attempt to respond to this. This is worse then anecdotal. You might have read the book, this story might be from the book, you've no idea why anyone involved in the possible story is doing anything they're doing and you've no idea whether you've left anything out of importance.
a) You didn't actually read the book you were promoting or
b) You did read the book which was so unmemorable that you had to go to Amazon.com and grab the pull quote.
If the book has better examples, stunners, find the book and post them. I'll check back later. For now, I'll stay deeply suspicious of anyone trumpeting "common sense".
Your little story is predicated on the notion that because this was nuns and a charity, the city should have waived the safety code requirements and just let them use it as a shelter. That that would be better for the homeless. That being in the waived shelter is better then the street.
And if the shelter burned down, trapping everyone inside because it didn't have sprinklers/fire doors/exit lights, if it collapsed because it was structurally unsound, if it exposed everyone inside to asbestos/flaking lead paint/rat feces/mercury/etc, what then? Do you still think they'd be better off?
Giving someone the thumbs up to put people in a dangerous situation in the name of charity isn't common sense. It's a recipe for disaster. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
You state that the anti-sodomy law was on the books but not enforced in Lawrence.This is completely wrong. While rare, it was enforced specifically in this case. The police were called to an apartment (based on false claim by a disgruntled neighbor who was later prosecuted for it) and walked in (the door wasn't locked) to find the two guys. They WERE arrested and WERE prosecuted. Though the conviction was a misdemeanor, it had legal repurcussions that neither felt they deserved. The police chose to arrest them, the prosecutor chose to prosecute the case.
Has anyone here worked on any alternatives? The report indicates that the Microsoft sound-based alternative was totally non-functional. Is that even a worthwhile path to work on?
Perhaps some sort of text challenge/response scenario that would require an explicit understanding of the challenge part: "Take the second-to-last letter of each word from the below text, reverse the order and write them capitalized" . With a wide enough range of such challenges, spambots would be out of luck.
The majority opinion written by Kennedy specifically threw out Bowers. And since the ruling is an extension of the Right To Privacy, it also applies to hetero/homosexual anti-sodomy laws.
overturn Bowers v. Hardwick (the 1986 ruling upholding anti-sodomy laws) and since the effects of this ruling allow judges to a) capriciously decide cases and b)protect corporations by excluding "controversial" research that indicates their malfeasance, I'm not holding my breath for a reversal anytime soon.
While the strength inherent in the mithril is a component in resisting spear thrusts, it is in fact the Elfish magic that the armor has been imbued with that absorbs and dissipates the force of the blow. This is also the major factor in the delicious nature of Keebler cookies, which are also Elfish.
I knew I read this months ago. And "The Nation" specifically says that they got the story from Ha'aretz, noting that the US news media hadn't picked up on the story. Other then some additional commentary, this is a repeat.
I'm sleeping easier now.
Innovate: Wait until someone develops something. Create inferior replication, use monopoly power and define as "part of the system" to crush original.
Feature: Bug
Compete: Use cash reserves/FUD/monopoly power to undercut superior products from other companies. When they are no longer viable, triple the price and then triple it again.
to Netscape 4.8. It's so much better.
And summer is here. Oh, good.
You can be RFID tracked anytime, anywhere, without your knowledge. Your location/possessions can be itemized/tracked/databased. Sounds like reasonable grounds for paranoia to me. Excuse me while I put back on my tin foil suit.
shoes, pants, tires, body in shields whenever I leave my house? After the doctors spent all that time convincing me to take off the tin foil suit, you're telling me to put it back on?
Do MS programmers get extra options if they release products with buffer overflows? It seems like every third security flaw is caused by buffer overflows.
Because the original judge correctly recognized that a) Sun would probably win on the merits and b) waiting for the end of the trial would probably make the issues moot (see IE vs. Netscape), he ordered that Microsoft had to include Sun's version of Java with their OS.
But this particular appeals court tends to be very pro-business (especially businesses that have contributed heavily to the Republican party) and ignored the issues. And since what's good for Microsoft is good for our troops, siding with Sun would mean the terrorists had won.
What they do: Lock the Army into a sweetheart contract that drains resources and supplies them with the most hackable, insecure, bloated OS available bar none.
Which leads me to question: Is Verizon just recognizing the situation was hopeless and acting responsibly/accordingly, or are they disarming their enemies only to lobby at the last minute for something (exhorbitant fees, special restrictions) and getting it passed while everyone else is fumbling? Or are they using their switch to gain some advantage over their wireless competitors(2. ??? 3. Profit)?