So you'd be happy leaving old people that hadn't figured this out to starve and rot in the streets?
Because it turns out that a lot of people are stupid, and a lot of people don't prepare. Or they lose it all defending a frivolous lawsuit, of get screwed over by a spouse in a divorce, or see repeated periodic market crashes when their investments mature, or... a million and one other things that leave them needing help.
I do not fear libertarianism. I revile it as the sick and selfish philosophy it truly is.
"for example, we don't want a bunch of crackheads around anyway, with or without the armed crack dealers."
No, you don't, but the current legal situation keeps both the crackheads and the armed dealers around. It would be nice to try and find a way to deal with both problems there, but I don't consider dealing with only one problem to be a waste of time.
Not that I necessarily come out in support of crack legalisation here, no sir, but I do support looking at different (evidence based!!) ways of reducing the harm done to society.
"Very few people would be OK with decriminalizing meth, heroin, cocaine, etc.
That's because they've been taught that these things are the devil incarnate, and that showing 'weakness' (i.e. any policy direction other than pushing sentencing ever upwards) is also evil.
Turns out heroin addiction can be managed quite effectively and various countries (Switzerland in particular, IIRC) have been quite successful in dealing with it by decriminalising it and turning heroin addicts into clients of the medical system. Younger people now associate heroin with ill-looking older people queuing up outside a hospital.
Cocaine, well, if a lot of people in powerful government and corporate positions were more honest about their younger days, that one would lose it's stigma pretty fast. Also it turns out that there was a UN study in the late 90s showing that a large number of people that used it had used it infrequently and temporarily, causing themselves no permanent health effects. That study was, unsurprisingly, suppressed by western governments and never published. It only leaked a couple of years ago.
Heroin, Meth and Cocaine may well fuck up society if freely available, but don't kid yourself that they were banned for good reason, they were banned as much due to anti-drug hysteria as any of the others. This can be shown by the continuing banning of new substances that have no established harm profile.
'ISP' seems to be a bit of a misnomer here, they were hosting a collaboration server that contained the data so I'd call them a hosting company.
And it looks like the production company relied on the hosting company to keep backups, which they neglected to do.
Otherwise I agree with you - you should have backups of the raw footage and the animation separately, you should have the finished product on the collab server, sure, but also on tape or HDD in secure storage somewhere. And if it was me I'd have it stored on a machine in our office, and I'd have my very own private set of blurays in my desk draw or even at home, 'just in case'
He's an opinionated, loudmouthed, immature cock. This makes him and his cohorts highly entertaining. And that's what top gear is, entertainment.
Clarkson also writes for the papers and whilst he, very occasionally, says some of the sort of "nobody else is daring to say it so I will" stuff, most of what he says is tripe, IMHO.
I still watch and enjoy top gear, it's funny and has fast shiny things. But I wouldn't consider much of what they do to reflect reality very well, not least because it's pretty bloody unlikely I'll ever drive (let alone own) one of the shiny things they play with. And any time he goes off-message from light entertainment and petrol and starts giving opinions (especially if globabl warming is involved in said opinions) it breaks the mood and just annoys me.
Right, there' s my two cents. I do also find it highly amusing that a british show about three muppets and some big engines is now one of the world's most popular tv shows!
So you're happy to both undermine the US economy by supporting overseas jobs AND perpetuate bad working conditions, in order to get cheap tuna.
You raise a false dichotomy by the way. It's doesn't have to be a choice between sweatshop labour or closing the factory due to costs. The third option is to pay a decent wage to well treated workers because that's the cost of entry to western markets. So long as the labour standards required to trade with the west are held consistent across companies seeking to sell to us then they are at no competitive disadvantage. Of course consumers in the west have to put up with some higher prices as a result, because we currently benefit greatly from the comparative cheapness of human labour in other places.
I figured that was the way it would have to be done, as I've made similar programs (just for SSL/HTTPS) myself, was just wondering if there was some clever way that companies worked around the need to have a new CA cert in every browser.
Sounds like a very useful tool for the network admin.
This relies on the browser trusting the proxy of course, and the proxy being able to fake being any/all websites.
What sorts of systems can do this at the moment?
I'm interested, because I can see it's possible to build it into an HTTP or HTTPS proxy, but there would be quite a lot of certificate futzing needed to get it working properly.
Slashdot Mirror
So you'd be happy leaving old people that hadn't figured this out to starve and rot in the streets?
Because it turns out that a lot of people are stupid, and a lot of people don't prepare. Or they lose it all defending a frivolous lawsuit, of get screwed over by a spouse in a divorce, or see repeated periodic market crashes when their investments mature, or... a million and one other things that leave them needing help.
I do not fear libertarianism. I revile it as the sick and selfish philosophy it truly is.
It also lead to people blinding/poisoning themselves by drinking all sorts of other organic compounds, including petrol and kerosene.
"for example, we don't want a bunch of crackheads around anyway, with or without the armed crack dealers."
No, you don't, but the current legal situation keeps both the crackheads and the armed dealers around. It would be nice to try and find a way to deal with both problems there, but I don't consider dealing with only one problem to be a waste of time.
Not that I necessarily come out in support of crack legalisation here, no sir, but I do support looking at different (evidence based!!) ways of reducing the harm done to society.
"Very few people would be OK with decriminalizing meth, heroin, cocaine, etc.
That's because they've been taught that these things are the devil incarnate, and that showing 'weakness' (i.e. any policy direction other than pushing sentencing ever upwards) is also evil.
Turns out heroin addiction can be managed quite effectively and various countries (Switzerland in particular, IIRC) have been quite successful in dealing with it by decriminalising it and turning heroin addicts into clients of the medical system. Younger people now associate heroin with ill-looking older people queuing up outside a hospital.
Cocaine, well, if a lot of people in powerful government and corporate positions were more honest about their younger days, that one would lose it's stigma pretty fast. Also it turns out that there was a UN study in the late 90s showing that a large number of people that used it had used it infrequently and temporarily, causing themselves no permanent health effects. That study was, unsurprisingly, suppressed by western governments and never published. It only leaked a couple of years ago.
Heroin, Meth and Cocaine may well fuck up society if freely available, but don't kid yourself that they were banned for good reason, they were banned as much due to anti-drug hysteria as any of the others. This can be shown by the continuing banning of new substances that have no established harm profile.
Turns out it's GPL violation, the guy based it off PCSX and wouldn't release the source.
Didn't you hear that debian, openSuSE, Arch, Grml and Gentoo are merging?
http://www.debian.org/
http://www.opensuse.org/
http://www.archlinux.org/
http://www.gentoo.org/
http://www.grml.org/
'ISP' seems to be a bit of a misnomer here, they were hosting a collaboration server that contained the data so I'd call them a hosting company.
And it looks like the production company relied on the hosting company to keep backups, which they neglected to do.
Otherwise I agree with you - you should have backups of the raw footage and the animation separately, you should have the finished product on the collab server, sure, but also on tape or HDD in secure storage somewhere. And if it was me I'd have it stored on a machine in our office, and I'd have my very own private set of blurays in my desk draw or even at home, 'just in case'
Fifth Gear still exists, or ran for a while, with Tiff and Vicki and others.
Nowhere near as much fun though.
Clarkson is a twat.
He's an opinionated, loudmouthed, immature cock. This makes him and his cohorts highly entertaining. And that's what top gear is, entertainment.
Clarkson also writes for the papers and whilst he, very occasionally, says some of the sort of "nobody else is daring to say it so I will" stuff, most of what he says is tripe, IMHO.
I still watch and enjoy top gear, it's funny and has fast shiny things. But I wouldn't consider much of what they do to reflect reality very well, not least because it's pretty bloody unlikely I'll ever drive (let alone own) one of the shiny things they play with. And any time he goes off-message from light entertainment and petrol and starts giving opinions (especially if globabl warming is involved in said opinions) it breaks the mood and just annoys me.
Right, there' s my two cents. I do also find it highly amusing that a british show about three muppets and some big engines is now one of the world's most popular tv shows!
Serial ain't going nowhere bub, how else am I supposed to debug my linux kernel ports to embedded hardware?
Noone except unwashed geeks with a lazy eye and a luddite streak.
Because some countries (the UK) will probably just be one huge city by 2050.
Can someone give me a heads-up before it happens (this time around) so I can squander my savings and get into lots of debt please?
As it is I'm not rich but neither do I have debt, and diminishing the value of my savings feels like robbing me to pay off other folks' mortgages.
So you're happy to both undermine the US economy by supporting overseas jobs AND perpetuate bad working conditions, in order to get cheap tuna.
You raise a false dichotomy by the way. It's doesn't have to be a choice between sweatshop labour or closing the factory due to costs. The third option is to pay a decent wage to well treated workers because that's the cost of entry to western markets. So long as the labour standards required to trade with the west are held consistent across companies seeking to sell to us then they are at no competitive disadvantage. Of course consumers in the west have to put up with some higher prices as a result, because we currently benefit greatly from the comparative cheapness of human labour in other places.
Oh sure, but Mr Schwarzenegger isn't all that bad surely?
There's a difference between playing it smart and investing a lot of money in getting the laws changed to keep your tax bill down.
One is an obligation of a business to keep tax down and profits up. The other is immoral and (IMHO) should be illegal.
Strange, I seem to have managed to hold down a job in plain old C for a while now. Never have done any OO since university. Never needed it.
Not everything is written in Java. Or C#
There are automated tools to do both, you just won't hear about them so much.
Look up sslsniff for an example.
Wifi more secure?
I don't think so. Injecting packets is not going to be a lot more tricky.
Not to mention you have to trust the wifi operator or anyone else that can gain conteol of the AP/router. Pretty trivial in a lot of places.
Only if the client has the certificate ahead of time. Otherwise it really isn't.
You would have self-signed certs presented as "semi-secure", which they are not.
Except many Iranians would identify as 'Persian', not Aryan, and dissociate the race from the country.
Fair enough!
I figured that was the way it would have to be done, as I've made similar programs (just for SSL/HTTPS) myself, was just wondering if there was some clever way that companies worked around the need to have a new CA cert in every browser.
Sounds like a very useful tool for the network admin.
I made one recently, it only took a few hundred lines of python.
This relies on the browser trusting the proxy of course, and the proxy being able to fake being any/all websites.
What sorts of systems can do this at the moment?
I'm interested, because I can see it's possible to build it into an HTTP or HTTPS proxy, but there would be quite a lot of certificate futzing needed to get it working properly.
Slightly buggy tiger-repelling rock?
"Three tigers today, thankfully rock working enough to keep the rest away"