What a mess of ridiculousness. I'd love to give an exposition on morality, but lack the time and space. . This shall have to suffice:
Every action can be moral, immoral, or amoral. Cheating certainly can be immoral, but not all moral offences are the same, and not every action is absolutely immoral in and of its nature. Furthermore not all immoral acts are equal in their immorality.
Having laid that foundation, yes I would say that in general cheating is immoral. If you agreed to follow a set of rules, you should, again in general, follow them. The immorality comes from you breaking your agreement, not necessarily from the absolute morality of the broken rule itself.
I did not mean to condemn you, per se, just the common attitude of adjusting ones morals to the actions of one's peers, a dangerous trend oft manipulated by powerful men to terrible results.
Uhm, I'm assuming that was in jest. Catholics sin so much that they are required to acknowledge that fact at least once a year in front of another person. Being surprised about that, is like being surprised that a mechanic has to fix his own car.
Not to me. Cheating, IMHO, is breaking the rules of a system to gain an advantage for yourself that you would not of otherwise had if you had not broken the rules.
Not everyone defines their own morality in terms of other people.
Yeah, Javascript can be malicious in the way you describe, but I think you're missing the point of Cross site scripting and Cross site Request Forgery attacks. Who cares about infecting your machine, when you can just drain someone's bank account with Javascript?
And detecting this kind of behaviour is a little more difficult, as some sites use the same code non-maliciously. You can either error on the side of security and break some sites, or allow some malicious code to work but not break anything.
Side note for consumer safety: Do NOT open any other browser windows/tabs of the same browser if you are accessing your online banking or other site which has a large amount of your personal data.
Adobe Reader isn't just slow at loading a pdf, its slow and crappy searching and browsing the currently loaded pdf. Going from Adobe to Okular was insane. I suddenly went from dreading reading PDF docs, to loving it. Haven't tried it in Chromium yet, but I know how much better PDF viewing can be outside of Adobe.
PS the bugs he was referring to are security vulnerabilities, in case you haven't figured that out by reading the 800 other posts talking about the vulnerabilities in Adobe. Now, is Google's auto-magically immune to them... No idea. Some of the vulnerabilities are somewhat baked into the featureset. You can't support all of the crazy things you can do in PDFs without providing some possibility of some bad PDFs doing dangerous things.
No, it ran on FreeBSD. And it ran that way when they bought it. Converting it to run on Win NT 4 took some time and many more boxes. They couldn't get it to run on win NT reliably enough until win 2000 was released.
You're reinventing the reasoning of the people in charge a the time. The motivation and rationale behind the attacks are well documented. It was not a military objective. You can argue all you want what motivations they should have had, or you would have had, but you can't argue what motivations the people in charge had at the time. They documented it.
So by your calculus a neutron bomb has no devastating effects, as it only targets humans and other living creatures, leaving infrastructure intact?
No, it doesn't. Its just an explanation of how investigations work. Its not at all saying that their crimes are comparable. Wouldn't you want equal treatment for all individuals under the law?
Its not flawed because they are putting Julian Assange on the same moral level as Capone ( they aren't), its flawed because there is no evidence that the Swedish were investigating him for anything else other than the sexual crimes.
With a nuke's blast range, almost nothing is a legitimate military target. The initial damage is too great, the lasting effects too devastating. If it was purely a millitary objective ( which historical accounts assure us it was definitely not), then they would have been better off continuing the conventional bombardment.
The use of nukes was really to cause massive casualties to demonstrate the inevitability of defeat if an all out assault with nukes were to be launched. It was aimed at getting them to surrender, not to disable the 2nd army headquarters, or reduce the small arms production.
Well, if they've already had 0 percent chance on an open battlefield, how much sense does it make in investing even more advanced battlefield technology? Maybe, we should invest in technology that will help us find them, prevent their attacks, or better protect those targeted by them.
You eeediot! Now everyone knows who has the anti-terrorism rock. You need to randomly give that rock to someone else to protect its location and identity. Go ahead an pop a cyanide pill so they can't torture you to get the new location.
Good rehashing of a classic argument, but its not really one you can win. Its like arguing what the world would be like if the united states didn't enter WW1. You can argue all you want, but you can't prove something that hasn't happened. In case you are wondering, I am agnostic to the current argument. I see he valid points on both sides. I think you'd see an increase in zombies, but I think the general zombie rate would be lower than it is with windows ( if linux were the top dog, for macs I'd imagine it would be higher than linux but slightly lower than windows).
That's absurd!! what kind of a low life would steal money out of the mouths of Wolfram developers! I know those guys, they already have to live in Illinois, what more punishment would you inflict upon them you callous brutes!
Extremely insightful. Ofcourse there has to be a balance between the costs of society and the benefits. It can't be used to outright justify any particular government run program. It might be nice if the government cleaned my house, but I'm not sure that would be the best use of taxes.
This is only allowed to be used in dev. They killed Open Solaris. It certainly seems like they are killing a good part of the *free* stuff from Sun to me.
Slashdot Mirror
What a mess of ridiculousness. I'd love to give an exposition on morality, but lack the time and space. . This shall have to suffice:
Every action can be moral, immoral, or amoral. Cheating certainly can be immoral, but not all moral offences are the same, and not every action is absolutely immoral in and of its nature. Furthermore not all immoral acts are equal in their immorality.
Having laid that foundation, yes I would say that in general cheating is immoral. If you agreed to follow a set of rules, you should, again in general, follow them. The immorality comes from you breaking your agreement, not necessarily from the absolute morality of the broken rule itself.
I did not mean to condemn you, per se, just the common attitude of adjusting ones morals to the actions of one's peers, a dangerous trend oft manipulated by powerful men to terrible results.
Uhm, I'm assuming that was in jest. Catholics sin so much that they are required to acknowledge that fact at least once a year in front of another person. Being surprised about that, is like being surprised that a mechanic has to fix his own car.
Not to me. Cheating, IMHO, is breaking the rules of a system to gain an advantage for yourself that you would not of otherwise had if you had not broken the rules.
Not everyone defines their own morality in terms of other people.
Yeah, Javascript can be malicious in the way you describe, but I think you're missing the point of Cross site scripting and Cross site Request Forgery attacks. Who cares about infecting your machine, when you can just drain someone's bank account with Javascript?
And detecting this kind of behaviour is a little more difficult, as some sites use the same code non-maliciously. You can either error on the side of security and break some sites, or allow some malicious code to work but not break anything.
Side note for consumer safety: Do NOT open any other browser windows/tabs of the same browser if you are accessing your online banking or other site which has a large amount of your personal data.
Adobe Reader isn't just slow at loading a pdf, its slow and crappy searching and browsing the currently loaded pdf. Going from Adobe to Okular was insane. I suddenly went from dreading reading PDF docs, to loving it. Haven't tried it in Chromium yet, but I know how much better PDF viewing can be outside of Adobe. PS the bugs he was referring to are security vulnerabilities, in case you haven't figured that out by reading the 800 other posts talking about the vulnerabilities in Adobe. Now, is Google's auto-magically immune to them ... No idea. Some of the vulnerabilities are somewhat baked into the featureset. You can't support all of the crazy things you can do in PDFs without providing some possibility of some bad PDFs doing dangerous things.
No, it ran on FreeBSD. And it ran that way when they bought it. Converting it to run on Win NT 4 took some time and many more boxes. They couldn't get it to run on win NT reliably enough until win 2000 was released.
Why not just use SSH/SCP for windows( it already exists, not difficult to install)?
A banana republic you say? Good choice! The CIA has *absolutely* no previous experience working in those countries. .
You're reinventing the reasoning of the people in charge a the time. The motivation and rationale behind the attacks are well documented. It was not a military objective. You can argue all you want what motivations they should have had, or you would have had, but you can't argue what motivations the people in charge had at the time. They documented it. So by your calculus a neutron bomb has no devastating effects, as it only targets humans and other living creatures, leaving infrastructure intact?
No, it doesn't. Its just an explanation of how investigations work. Its not at all saying that their crimes are comparable. Wouldn't you want equal treatment for all individuals under the law?
Its not flawed because they are putting Julian Assange on the same moral level as Capone ( they aren't), its flawed because there is no evidence that the Swedish were investigating him for anything else other than the sexual crimes.
With a nuke's blast range, almost nothing is a legitimate military target. The initial damage is too great, the lasting effects too devastating. If it was purely a millitary objective ( which historical accounts assure us it was definitely not), then they would have been better off continuing the conventional bombardment.
The use of nukes was really to cause massive casualties to demonstrate the inevitability of defeat if an all out assault with nukes were to be launched. It was aimed at getting them to surrender, not to disable the 2nd army headquarters, or reduce the small arms production.
Well, if they've already had 0 percent chance on an open battlefield, how much sense does it make in investing even more advanced battlefield technology? Maybe, we should invest in technology that will help us find them, prevent their attacks, or better protect those targeted by them.
You eeediot! Now everyone knows who has the anti-terrorism rock. You need to randomly give that rock to someone else to protect its location and identity. Go ahead an pop a cyanide pill so they can't torture you to get the new location.
Good rehashing of a classic argument, but its not really one you can win. Its like arguing what the world would be like if the united states didn't enter WW1. You can argue all you want, but you can't prove something that hasn't happened. In case you are wondering, I am agnostic to the current argument. I see he valid points on both sides. I think you'd see an increase in zombies, but I think the general zombie rate would be lower than it is with windows ( if linux were the top dog, for macs I'd imagine it would be higher than linux but slightly lower than windows).
Yeah, You and I know it doesn't, but most people think it is. And, sadly, what most people think is more important than the truth sometimes.
No, Not really. That's what makes them "religious wackos" rather than just "religious people".
Yeah, but then you have to use IE.
Yeah, I thought that was pretty suspicious too. Until I found this reference on a website held in the highest esteem.
That's absurd!! what kind of a low life would steal money out of the mouths of Wolfram developers! I know those guys, they already have to live in Illinois, what more punishment would you inflict upon them you callous brutes!
Thats why *I* pirated Maple.
Extremely insightful. Ofcourse there has to be a balance between the costs of society and the benefits. It can't be used to outright justify any particular government run program. It might be nice if the government cleaned my house, but I'm not sure that would be the best use of taxes.
Yeah, Solaris as an open platform: that's the good stuff.
This is only allowed to be used in dev. They killed Open Solaris. It certainly seems like they are killing a good part of the *free* stuff from Sun to me.
This D May also help prevent all kinds of problems.
You mean like the registry ....
[ducks outa the way]