Silly people. You don't have a "right" to fly. You're partaking in a commercial exchange of cash for flight privileges with a private company. That company has a right, and a responsibility to its other customers, to determine that any customer is legitimate.
From my understanding, these are the same types of questions that Israeli airlines routinely screen their passengers with and they've only had one hostage event in the last 30-40 years. It isn't so much the answers that they are interested in as it is the composure of the person answering them and their body language.
I look forward to a day when the "authorities" or the airline companies say fuck all about profiling and begin asking hard questions to anyone and everyone even the slightest bit suspicious. If you don't like it, get in your car and drive.
That's when they are supposed to use them. Going hands-on with a suspect is dangerous to the suspect and the officer.
Have you ever seen a man beaten with a nightstick about the head and shoulders? It's not pretty. It often results in catastrophic injuries to the subject. These are weapons to be sure, but they're a far cry better than having to physically beat someone into submission.
I know of one person. One woman that woke up with a dark figure ripping her night clothers off of her with his hand over her mouth telling her he was going to kill her if she made a sound. Instead, she got her gun from her night stand and shot the mother fucker in the chest. Unfortunately it was off center, so it didn't get his heart. She then proceeded to kick the living hell out of him until the cops and ambulance got there.
I may just be a stupid American, but knowing of that one experience is enough for me to say we all should have that right to protect our own selves, our families, and our property. You might not like it, but I don't give a shit. Fuck you and anyone else that tells me I can't do my utmost in the defense of my household.
Pesky thing about us Americans. We hate taxes for the same reason we want our own guns. We don't trust the government to take better care of us that we can do on our own. A perfect example of the difference between America (on majority) and Europe (on majority), or hell, even between the "red states" and "blue states". You depend on the government for everything including your safety. We depend on ourselves.
As for all the gun-related crime and accidents that get trotted out in the name of gun control, shove them up your ass. With freedom comes responsibility. I'm sorry some morons can't be bothered to properly educate their kids to respect firearms and about gun safety, but we're not socialists here, you don't get to punish the whole for the fuck ups of a few. In regards to the crime, perhaps removing the incentive for the crime, i.e. addiction, poverty, etc, would do more than taking the gun out of the criminals' hands (as if that were really possible with any kind of gun control anyway).
You're mistaken to draw comparisons between tasers and handguns.
Tasers are a "hands-on" weapon alternative. They are alternatives to nightsticks, lojacks, and actually putting hands physically on a suspect. This reduces chance for harm to both the suspect getting his brains beaten in and the officer since he maintains physical distance and can control the suspect more easily.
A handgun or any other lethal weapon is to kill a suspect that poses a lethal threat to another individual.
Both have their uses, but neither is a replacement for the other. You will never see a breech-entry taking place with tasers wielded as opposed to firearms.
After playing counter strike and battlefield 1942 religiously and moving to a new city about 18 months ago, I found myself evaluating every new building and room for breech and exit strategy.
Scarily, I also found myself sitting in the cafeteria or on the patio on breaks staring across the way at a vacant high-rise building thinking, "hmmm, now THERE would be an incredible sniper spot."
tvtorrents.net has an RSS feed w/ the most recent 20 torrent posts. They've also got a custom-made RSS reader that scans it on the hour and bashes it against a filter list you create with their "show selector" tool (in which you select the name of a show that has a predefined RegEx entry in a file and it copies that entry to your filter list, so if you can write RegEx then you don't need anything other than a TVGuide). All in all it works fairly well. They're working on a new version of the reader because it crashes sometimes, but the principle is there. Broadcast syndication via RSS+BT. Voila!
As soon as I can get a reliable system (w/o the RSS reader crashes) so I don't have to manually check the show queue every couple of days then I'm pulling the plug on my cable subscription and donating to the site. It's basically an online TIVO without commercials.
First of all, the house doesn't care in poker, because they get a share of the pot and aren't in an adversarial role. The only reason they might care is if this type of thing scares off real players and reduces the overall take in the course of an evening's play.
Secondly, depending on the casino, you can ask the dealer what the odds are, what the house's play would be, or you can even ask the dealer to play your entire hand as the house would. This varies from game to game and casino to casino.
Lastly, the house allows you to have certain materials available when playing. In Vegas, there are "player cards" or cheat sheets for black jack and other games that are about the size of an actual card, but show the plays that you should make based on certain stats (what you have, what the dealer/other players have, etc). Last I went to Vegas the only rule was that you had to set it down on the table before play began. As long as you weren't sitting next to some idiot that messed up the card distribution then it usually panned out. I believe there are some casinos that don't allow them, but most do, although you can't use them at the high minimum bet (>$50 or so) tables.
Basically I don't see the problem as long as this "bot" is really just a tool and the player is still interacting with the game, i.e., not automated play. I see it as a way to even the odds a bit and help the noobs not make so many stupid mistakes. Can't you remember a time when you just glanced at your cards and thought you had a certain hand and as you tossed them down in triumph you realized you misread the hand?... I can. Preventing those kinds of mistakes would save everyone some grief. Although I suppose poker wouldn't be the game it is if everyone didn't have a great story about a few hands.
This crap came out in July and so did El Reg's response via Ashlee Vance. Why is it important what this guy said a month later, particularly when it mimics what was said last month in response to the "research?"
Thank you for sharing what you think you feel about spinach. In a short while you will be contacted by a local reprentative to advise you why you are wrong and tell you how you will think about spinach in the future.
Thank you,
A.S.H.C.R.O.F.T.
[Anti-Spinach Hating Council for Re-education Of Free Thought]
You poor bastard, I hope you already took the FE...
The TI-89 is banned on the Fundamentals of Engineering exam now. I took the exam last fall when it was the last time we could use it. Thank goodness I passed.
Wow. I can't believe how many "don't take a camera into a theatre" posts there have been. It seems most people are, yet again, missing the point.
Several things here warrant serious attention...
Criminalization of acts covered by civil law
Last I checked, violating copyright was a civil issue. This law seeks to make a criminal case out of a clearly civil case.
It also acts as criminalizing the 'contract' that you enter into with a theatre, namely not bringing in outside food/drink or recording/flash devices. If one part is now criminal, why not the other?
The theatre has every right to make its own rules and kick people out violating them, but that is a distinctly civil law/contractual issue.
Why in the hell are we granting the power of the state, i.e. use of force, search and seizure, to movie theatres and studios? Talk about jack booted thugs.
posession of a recording device != copyright infringement
Just because I have a camera with me does not mean I am violating copyright. Perhaps I had it earlier in the day, couldn't get home, and won't leave it in the parking lot to get stolen. That should be my perogative, at the discression of the theatre if they authorize it.
Even if being used, that still doesn't mean I'm violating copyright, i.e. I'm recording an audience's reaction to a film or something. This law doesn't make provisions for that case, which would normally be granted by the movie theatre. Even if the theatre says it is okay, the law is still being broken.
If not true, then everyone that ever bought an optical drive for their PC should be arrested under similar laws for the potential of violating copyright law. This law is no different than outlawing posession of VCRs, DVRs, CD-R/W, DVD-R/W due to their potential use.
Ignoring real piracy sources.
The last time I looked, screeners where the most common dupes out there, not camcorder versions of the movies.
Why is the industry criminalizing what some schmuck does in a theatre that doesn't lead to wide spread piracy?
Why is the industry ignoring the real sources such as screener copies and digital copies of the reels that go out to the theatres?
There is no possible way you can convince me that the DVD quality copies with liner notes available on the streets of Hong Kong one day after the movie's release are from a camcorder of some guy in LA. How ridiculous.
Personally I couldn't care less about what goes on in theatres. My wife and I haven't been to the movies but maybe once or twice in the last six months since we started using NetFlix (which rules, by the way). However, this law and it's enforcement seems like just another encroachment on individual freedom instead of the policing and punishment of actual illegal criminal or civil activity. I mean, why do the hard job of policing the activity, when you can make the tool illegal and make your job 100 times easier.
WTF?
Just because I have a video recorder in a theatre is no reason to put me in jail. If I was actually recording the damned film, then fine, but there are countless reasons someone would take one in and not use it or use it righteously. Reason one, I go the theatre after using it somewhere else, and I'll be damned if I leave my $2000 video camera in the car to be stolen. Reason two, I'm a proud parent that has taken a herd of kids to the movies for a birthday party or something and want to record the event. I'm sure there are more.
Screw you and anyone else that thinks the simple posession of a legal object means I'm going to be using it illegaly. Go take your fascism somewhere else.
Now only if they had something that would remember all those console commands
man pages?
I hated reading them at first when I just wanted a short (easy) answer. But once I've digested one, it is a hundred times easier to review it again and extract the one thing I need. In fact, man COMMANDNAME | grep -i "whatever you're looking for" is the best thing ever.
As a side note, I think this article series is the best thing THG has done. For true power users of windows, the real draw of *NIX is the CLI. That's where the real power is. I truly hope that THG will eventually cover the use of the CLI for people new to Linux, in particular the basic UNIX structures of STDIN and STDOUT and how to utilize them with |, >, and >>.
I also hope they cover some of the more useful commands that aren't part of the windows CLI tool list (cut, join, grep, sed, awk, etc). They don't need to detail them, seing as entire books have been dedicated to just a few, just let users know that they're there. I think that most power users are smart enough to figure out how something works, but they have to know it's there before they start looking into it.
I think you're fooling yourself. All you tin-foil hat types like to think that the world's coporations are conspiring against you.
I promise you that if the business case was there for SATA drives, optical or not, removable or not, then the manufacturers would be rushing them to market. Their motivation to get into your wallet is quite large. Why would they want to wait for DRM to be implemented? It's just one more technology that, if integrated into their devices, will require more licensing agreements and rights/royalty fees. Not to mention the fact that if they implement DRM it will have an impact on volumes of data needing to be written to drives, lessening demand for their products.
First of all, don't use WEP. Many many articles about it being broken have been written. At a minimum you should be running a linksys with at least v1.41 (1.42?) of the firmware and be using the WPA security.
If you're doing anything that needs real encryption, such as administering anything requiring strong passwords or doing financial transactions, you should be researching a VPN layer or something along those lines.
Along the same lines, this seems to open up a new service category... VPN service authentication... Allow you to get a secure link from wherever you are physically at back to the VPN point. Protect your packets from being sniffed (and usable) by wire or wireless. Anyone seen this type of thing? I've only seen server+client side implementation, never an auth service.
Hint: Fines aren't a deterant when you have 50 billion dollars. They're a cost of doing business. I wonder if some accounting guy hasn't already tried claiming fines as a capital expenditure to reduce tax liability.
It clearly states that customers without support contracts or with uncooperative 3rd party vendors can go through the CISCO TAC (number listed on reference article) to get the proper patches.
Everyone affected, assuming they at least have the serial number still on the box, can get the patch, which is The Right Thing To Do(tm).
I finally got to the bottom and had a list of about 10-20 programs and around 20-30 tabs (I love fire{bird|fox}) queued up for bookmarking in my network utilities folder.
To all that took the time to post on the thread, thank you. It isn't often that one comes across a gold mine like this that yields so much good information in regards to tools and methods to becoming a better admin or power user. Maybe in a few more years I won't feel like a pretender using the root login.
-3phase
----------
you can't spell gEEk without an EE (yah, I copied that from someone)
Could you be any more melodramatic? You act like they're killing people or something.
We're not talking about vacating ethical responsibility here. We're talking about either forking over cash for licenses or forking over cash to litigate the need to not get those licenses. It's a simple cost and risk analysis problem. Get a grip and realize that it's just a matter of cost, not ethics. Principals are not the same as ethics.
If you're not willing to pay this company's legal fees then you shouldn't expect them to be willing to pay for the cost of defending your principals.
I've seen countless people saying 'why didn't he explore the issues' blah blah blah before signing on with SCO. What they neglect to consider is that as a for-profit business, the company's role is not to care about the issues, but decide which is going to cost more, signing the contract (and suffering the resulting backlash) or getting their asses sued so they can make a stand on principals. As they don't have IBM's warchest of cash and IP for cross-licensing deals I think he chose the right course of action.
Instead of a poorly informed CEO making a bad decision and in need of a PR guy, this looks to me like he made the right decision for the bottom line (no more churn than normal after the announcement) to the company and now he's paying lip-service to the user community so he can perhaps lower his already "normal" ratio of sites lost to sites gained.
All in all, looks like a win-win. Covered from the law suits and now looking like he agrees with the anti-SCO crowd.
Looks like he's got his cake and gets to eat it too.
Slashdot Mirror
Silly people. You don't have a "right" to fly. You're partaking in a commercial exchange of cash for flight privileges with a private company. That company has a right, and a responsibility to its other customers, to determine that any customer is legitimate.
From my understanding, these are the same types of questions that Israeli airlines routinely screen their passengers with and they've only had one hostage event in the last 30-40 years. It isn't so much the answers that they are interested in as it is the composure of the person answering them and their body language.
I look forward to a day when the "authorities" or the airline companies say fuck all about profiling and begin asking hard questions to anyone and everyone even the slightest bit suspicious. If you don't like it, get in your car and drive.
That's when they are supposed to use them. Going hands-on with a suspect is dangerous to the suspect and the officer.
Have you ever seen a man beaten with a nightstick about the head and shoulders? It's not pretty. It often results in catastrophic injuries to the subject. These are weapons to be sure, but they're a far cry better than having to physically beat someone into submission.
I know of one person. One woman that woke up with a dark figure ripping her night clothers off of her with his hand over her mouth telling her he was going to kill her if she made a sound. Instead, she got her gun from her night stand and shot the mother fucker in the chest. Unfortunately it was off center, so it didn't get his heart. She then proceeded to kick the living hell out of him until the cops and ambulance got there.
I may just be a stupid American, but knowing of that one experience is enough for me to say we all should have that right to protect our own selves, our families, and our property. You might not like it, but I don't give a shit. Fuck you and anyone else that tells me I can't do my utmost in the defense of my household.
Pesky thing about us Americans. We hate taxes for the same reason we want our own guns. We don't trust the government to take better care of us that we can do on our own. A perfect example of the difference between America (on majority) and Europe (on majority), or hell, even between the "red states" and "blue states". You depend on the government for everything including your safety. We depend on ourselves.
As for all the gun-related crime and accidents that get trotted out in the name of gun control, shove them up your ass. With freedom comes responsibility. I'm sorry some morons can't be bothered to properly educate their kids to respect firearms and about gun safety, but we're not socialists here, you don't get to punish the whole for the fuck ups of a few. In regards to the crime, perhaps removing the incentive for the crime, i.e. addiction, poverty, etc, would do more than taking the gun out of the criminals' hands (as if that were really possible with any kind of gun control anyway).
You're mistaken to draw comparisons between tasers and handguns.
Tasers are a "hands-on" weapon alternative. They are alternatives to nightsticks, lojacks, and actually putting hands physically on a suspect. This reduces chance for harm to both the suspect getting his brains beaten in and the officer since he maintains physical distance and can control the suspect more easily.
A handgun or any other lethal weapon is to kill a suspect that poses a lethal threat to another individual.
Both have their uses, but neither is a replacement for the other. You will never see a breech-entry taking place with tasers wielded as opposed to firearms.
After playing counter strike and battlefield 1942 religiously and moving to a new city about 18 months ago, I found myself evaluating every new building and room for breech and exit strategy.
:)
Scarily, I also found myself sitting in the cafeteria or on the patio on breaks staring across the way at a vacant high-rise building thinking, "hmmm, now THERE would be an incredible sniper spot."
I'm glad I don't own a rifle.
Already exists...
tvtorrents.net has an RSS feed w/ the most recent 20 torrent posts. They've also got a custom-made RSS reader that scans it on the hour and bashes it against a filter list you create with their "show selector" tool (in which you select the name of a show that has a predefined RegEx entry in a file and it copies that entry to your filter list, so if you can write RegEx then you don't need anything other than a TVGuide). All in all it works fairly well. They're working on a new version of the reader because it crashes sometimes, but the principle is there. Broadcast syndication via RSS+BT. Voila!
As soon as I can get a reliable system (w/o the RSS reader crashes) so I don't have to manually check the show queue every couple of days then I'm pulling the plug on my cable subscription and donating to the site. It's basically an online TIVO without commercials.
First of all, the house doesn't care in poker, because they get a share of the pot and aren't in an adversarial role. The only reason they might care is if this type of thing scares off real players and reduces the overall take in the course of an evening's play.
Secondly, depending on the casino, you can ask the dealer what the odds are, what the house's play would be, or you can even ask the dealer to play your entire hand as the house would. This varies from game to game and casino to casino.
Lastly, the house allows you to have certain materials available when playing. In Vegas, there are "player cards" or cheat sheets for black jack and other games that are about the size of an actual card, but show the plays that you should make based on certain stats (what you have, what the dealer/other players have, etc). Last I went to Vegas the only rule was that you had to set it down on the table before play began. As long as you weren't sitting next to some idiot that messed up the card distribution then it usually panned out. I believe there are some casinos that don't allow them, but most do, although you can't use them at the high minimum bet (>$50 or so) tables.
Basically I don't see the problem as long as this "bot" is really just a tool and the player is still interacting with the game, i.e., not automated play. I see it as a way to even the odds a bit and help the noobs not make so many stupid mistakes. Can't you remember a time when you just glanced at your cards and thought you had a certain hand and as you tossed them down in triumph you realized you misread the hand?... I can. Preventing those kinds of mistakes would save everyone some grief. Although I suppose poker wouldn't be the game it is if everyone didn't have a great story about a few hands.
This crap came out in July and so did El Reg's response via Ashlee Vance. Why is it important what this guy said a month later, particularly when it mimics what was said last month in response to the "research?"
Thank you for sharing what you think you feel about spinach. In a short while you will be contacted by a local reprentative to advise you why you are wrong and tell you how you will think about spinach in the future.
Thank you,
A.S.H.C.R.O.F.T.
[Anti-Spinach Hating Council for Re-education Of Free Thought]
...is don't talk about Spinning Cube of Potential Doom. You must now be punished for breaking the first rule.
we saw this back in the early 90s in a documentary named "h4ck3r5".
all your cube are belong to us.
You poor bastard, I hope you already took the FE... The TI-89 is banned on the Fundamentals of Engineering exam now. I took the exam last fall when it was the last time we could use it. Thank goodness I passed.
Several things here warrant serious attention...
- Criminalization of acts covered by civil law
- Last I checked, violating copyright was a civil issue. This law seeks to make a criminal case out of a clearly civil case.
- It also acts as criminalizing the 'contract' that you enter into with a theatre, namely not bringing in outside food/drink or recording/flash devices. If one part is now criminal, why not the other?
- The theatre has every right to make its own rules and kick people out violating them, but that is a distinctly civil law/contractual issue.
- Why in the hell are we granting the power of the state, i.e. use of force, search and seizure, to movie theatres and studios? Talk about jack booted thugs.
- posession of a recording device != copyright infringement
- Just because I have a camera with me does not mean I am violating copyright. Perhaps I had it earlier in the day, couldn't get home, and won't leave it in the parking lot to get stolen. That should be my perogative, at the discression of the theatre if they authorize it.
- Even if being used, that still doesn't mean I'm violating copyright, i.e. I'm recording an audience's reaction to a film or something. This law doesn't make provisions for that case, which would normally be granted by the movie theatre. Even if the theatre says it is okay, the law is still being broken.
- If not true, then everyone that ever bought an optical drive for their PC should be arrested under similar laws for the potential of violating copyright law. This law is no different than outlawing posession of VCRs, DVRs, CD-R/W, DVD-R/W due to their potential use.
- Ignoring real piracy sources.
- The last time I looked, screeners where the most common dupes out there, not camcorder versions of the movies.
- Why is the industry criminalizing what some schmuck does in a theatre that doesn't lead to wide spread piracy?
- Why is the industry ignoring the real sources such as screener copies and digital copies of the reels that go out to the theatres?
- There is no possible way you can convince me that the DVD quality copies with liner notes available on the streets of Hong Kong one day after the movie's release are from a camcorder of some guy in LA. How ridiculous.
Personally I couldn't care less about what goes on in theatres. My wife and I haven't been to the movies but maybe once or twice in the last six months since we started using NetFlix (which rules, by the way). However, this law and it's enforcement seems like just another encroachment on individual freedom instead of the policing and punishment of actual illegal criminal or civil activity. I mean, why do the hard job of policing the activity, when you can make the tool illegal and make your job 100 times easier.WTF? Just because I have a video recorder in a theatre is no reason to put me in jail. If I was actually recording the damned film, then fine, but there are countless reasons someone would take one in and not use it or use it righteously. Reason one, I go the theatre after using it somewhere else, and I'll be damned if I leave my $2000 video camera in the car to be stolen. Reason two, I'm a proud parent that has taken a herd of kids to the movies for a birthday party or something and want to record the event. I'm sure there are more.
Screw you and anyone else that thinks the simple posession of a legal object means I'm going to be using it illegaly. Go take your fascism somewhere else.
Now only if they had something that would remember all those console commands
man pages?
I hated reading them at first when I just wanted a short (easy) answer. But once I've digested one, it is a hundred times easier to review it again and extract the one thing I need. In fact, man COMMANDNAME | grep -i "whatever you're looking for" is the best thing ever.
As a side note, I think this article series is the best thing THG has done. For true power users of windows, the real draw of *NIX is the CLI. That's where the real power is. I truly hope that THG will eventually cover the use of the CLI for people new to Linux, in particular the basic UNIX structures of STDIN and STDOUT and how to utilize them with |, >, and >>.
I also hope they cover some of the more useful commands that aren't part of the windows CLI tool list (cut, join, grep, sed, awk, etc). They don't need to detail them, seing as entire books have been dedicated to just a few, just let users know that they're there. I think that most power users are smart enough to figure out how something works, but they have to know it's there before they start looking into it.
I think you're fooling yourself. All you tin-foil hat types like to think that the world's coporations are conspiring against you.
I promise you that if the business case was there for SATA drives, optical or not, removable or not, then the manufacturers would be rushing them to market. Their motivation to get into your wallet is quite large. Why would they want to wait for DRM to be implemented? It's just one more technology that, if integrated into their devices, will require more licensing agreements and rights/royalty fees. Not to mention the fact that if they implement DRM it will have an impact on volumes of data needing to be written to drives, lessening demand for their products.
First of all, don't use WEP. Many many articles about it being broken have been written. At a minimum you should be running a linksys with at least v1.41 (1.42?) of the firmware and be using the WPA security.
If you're doing anything that needs real encryption, such as administering anything requiring strong passwords or doing financial transactions, you should be researching a VPN layer or something along those lines.
Along the same lines, this seems to open up a new service category... VPN service authentication... Allow you to get a secure link from wherever you are physically at back to the VPN point. Protect your packets from being sniffed (and usable) by wire or wireless. Anyone seen this type of thing? I've only seen server+client side implementation, never an auth service.
Hint: Fines aren't a deterant when you have 50 billion dollars. They're a cost of doing business. I wonder if some accounting guy hasn't already tried claiming fines as a capital expenditure to reduce tax liability.
RTFA moron.
It clearly states that customers without support contracts or with uncooperative 3rd party vendors can go through the CISCO TAC (number listed on reference article) to get the proper patches.
Everyone affected, assuming they at least have the serial number still on the box, can get the patch, which is The Right Thing To Do(tm).
...thread on slashdot I've ever read.
I finally got to the bottom and had a list of about 10-20 programs and around 20-30 tabs (I love fire{bird|fox}) queued up for bookmarking in my network utilities folder.
To all that took the time to post on the thread, thank you. It isn't often that one comes across a gold mine like this that yields so much good information in regards to tools and methods to becoming a better admin or power user. Maybe in a few more years I won't feel like a pretender using the root login.
-3phase
----------
you can't spell gEEk without an EE (yah, I copied that from someone)
Could you be any more melodramatic? You act like they're killing people or something.
We're not talking about vacating ethical responsibility here. We're talking about either forking over cash for licenses or forking over cash to litigate the need to not get those licenses. It's a simple cost and risk analysis problem. Get a grip and realize that it's just a matter of cost, not ethics. Principals are not the same as ethics.
If you're not willing to pay this company's legal fees then you shouldn't expect them to be willing to pay for the cost of defending your principals.
Riiiiight.
Just like the predator drone is a non-weaponized reconnaissance vehicle. Err...
I've seen countless people saying 'why didn't he explore the issues' blah blah blah before signing on with SCO. What they neglect to consider is that as a for-profit business, the company's role is not to care about the issues, but decide which is going to cost more, signing the contract (and suffering the resulting backlash) or getting their asses sued so they can make a stand on principals. As they don't have IBM's warchest of cash and IP for cross-licensing deals I think he chose the right course of action.
Instead of a poorly informed CEO making a bad decision and in need of a PR guy, this looks to me like he made the right decision for the bottom line (no more churn than normal after the announcement) to the company and now he's paying lip-service to the user community so he can perhaps lower his already "normal" ratio of sites lost to sites gained.
All in all, looks like a win-win. Covered from the law suits and now looking like he agrees with the anti-SCO crowd.
Looks like he's got his cake and gets to eat it too.
So are we supposed to be f*$@ing pi$$ed that we're sending people to space? Or that we're not going to send them to rescue the hubble?
1: If LaunchingMenInSpace Is True then OutRage(Cost)
2: If LaunchingMenInSpace Is False then OutRage(Science)
3: GoTo 1