How is this a "Freedom of Speech" issue, exactly? What, are they going to start broadcasting your voice recordings with their audio flag now? That doesn't even consider the fact that the RIAA is under no obligation to let you speak freely within their domain. And, of course, if you're not talking about rights here, the whole statement was totally off the wall since NOBODY is obligated to let you speak freely otherwise.
Keep it within the proper context, please. We don't need frothing loons talking about free speech issues in a consumer rights situation. Besides, it's still a capitalist system - just stop listening to their music. I'm sure that since the rest of the ignorant public is so concerned about these issues the way that all these screaming Slashbots are, the boycott will take off "Real Soon Now" anyway.
That's EXACTLY what came to mind when I read that. Imagine - you're steering this car through a little 3d raceway. The ability for abuse is mind boggling, but, what's worse, is it sort of removes the element of threat and leaves the "driver" in a more detached position. When you drive your own vehicle, your skin is on the line. When someone else drives your vehicle, they don't have that issue.
I could see some idiot putting the car on cruise control remotely (either through poor design or as a hack to the vehicle/controller) and getting up to go get a pepsi or a beer or something.... just not a good situation.
Not to go about trying to legitamize the booger-flinging little brats that run around ripping off songs on p2p and ruining a good thing for everyone else, but how, exactly, do you propose that we reward good behavior when there isn't any around? The problem here is that there are so many ridiculously deep levels of the RIAA that, even with ongoing lists of tainted labels, it's almost impossible to keep up with what is and what isn't poisoned by the RIAA's presence. Even individual bands flipping between labels can confuse matters. My KMFDM collection is clean so far, but I won't finish up the rest of it because some of the later albums aren't. What now?
This problem extends beyond the RIAA too. Where do I go for high speed internet? I can get *DSL from Verizon, but they're pure evil, and I can get cable from Adelphia, but they're staffed entirely by morons and escapees from a Down's Syndrome group home.
With the conglomerates and monopolies overrunning government policy makers and quietly spreading their tendrils through previously independant operations, it's almost impossible to find any "good behavior" in a company in this country anymore, and I can't afford the higher prices of little local mom and pops (beause, despite what many, many very stupid people say, the economy is still a shithole).
It's hard to reward good behavior when there isn't any....
What, you think they wouldn't if they could? They were beaten to the punch on all the worthwhile patents. The only reason they don't run around slapping people with patent infringement claims is that they know they're on shaky ground in that department, and that's probably one weak spot that Microsoft couldn't throw enough money at to become an industry leader in.
Geeks must like trucks. I saw a bumper sticker with that and the "replace you with a very small shell script" joke on the back window of a souped-up F-150. I've seen similar geekiness on other trucks.
It was very confusing to me - seeing a giant-ass jacked up rumbling truck with an NRA sticker and a peeing calvin on one side and "shell script" and "read your e-mail" stickers on the other.
Hmmm, yes. Let's latch on to one complaint that I have about PDFs - the crappy viewer from Adobe - and pretend that that's all of them, indeed, shall we?
On top of that, let's ignore that it put the hooks into IE on its own without asking me, let's just forget the fact that it opened in the background behind the IE window instead of overtop of it, and let's just ignore the inconvenient point that this was the first notice that came up since I installed the software, so I had no reason to go wandering about the preferences to turn off a "feature" that insists on tossing itself in your face by default without notice. Good idea. This way, we can blame the user for the fact that Acrobat Reader is a piece of shit instead of just accepting that Acrobat Reader is a piece of shit and PDF files are the wrong format to distribute web content in (for reasons entirely unrelated to Acrobat Reader). Of course, it all makes sense now!
Then, let's make up some irrational, unrelated bullshit about security and act like that has anything at all to do with my dislike of Acrobat Reader!
My god, man! You're some sort of genius, able to define reality simply by making it up as you go!
Uh... great. It looks like you got the HEAD response from my personal site. So?
Although, as I've ranted about before, the clueless dolts have no clue what they're talking about anyway. We've been using Perl for 2+ years at my instigation and it's run circles around that ASP garbage we have. I also got IT to install Apache HTTPD on my box for testing and design purposes. Technically, however, our corporate policy is that "free software.. is a liability".
Stop being a raving, lunatic fanboy. It's the legal department's fault I'm not allowed to use them ("...determined that free software is a liability and is not really free...") and the IT group will have my head on a plate if I abuse my admin privilege on this box and install one anyway.
Now then, fanboy, why don't you ask what I use at home where I have complete control of my systems?
I LOATHE Acrobat Reader, yes, but I also hate pdf files. I'm not even that big a fan of xpdf (not that that's an option at work anyway). I have yet to see anything being distributed via pdf that couldn't have been distributed as plain text or, if it required diagrams and such, HTML. pdf is like taking a nice, clean HTML document and turning it into a gigantic, unmanageable, honking piece of crap. Little point indeed.
PDF, flash, and java applets are the worst file formats ever inflicted on the web/Internet in the name of substandardization...
I second the HTML version. Good old Adobe - popped up a nice little window in the background bugging me to update and stalled the IE process. Since the window went to the background, all I could see was the stalled process, and I killed IE, which, of course, closed all my windows. I hate pdf files...
Anyway, here's a consideratoin: semi-disgruntled employees. For example, I'm not disloyal enough to actively seek to damage the company's systems or information, but with the way they treat employees, and the way my dysfunctional department operates, I'm not loyal enough to sit and try to think of strong passwords every month. So, I come up with creative ways to circumvent the draconian password policy instead. Ironically, some of my stronger passwords have been defeated by this overly strict ruleset and wound up with me simply appending a character to a weaker password to get around it.
The lesson: draconian password policies hurt security and audit your password lists on a regular basis (at least randomly sample them regularly). Most of your users probably don't give a crap about their passwords because they don't give a crap about what happens to the company's systems and information.
First of all, if there are 120,000 people in this country that are really terrorists that are that easy to spot, we're already up shit creek and the paddle's still back on the shore. Second, I don't know about you, but when people start getting scored on their "terrorism quotient", I get a little scared about what my tax dollars are paying to do to me. I'm all for identifying REAL terrorists and going out and getting them, but I'd sure like to know that they aren't "real" just because they got a high score one some stupid spook's spreadsheet.
Oh baloney. There are a bunch of open relays in China, so block them. If the admin's too dumb to close the relay, that's the admin's problem and we shouldn't suffer for their inability to maintain their server properly. In fact, I support blacklisting ANY open relay that's being used by spammers regardless of what country it's in.
Besides, you don't have to block them altogether. You can blacklist the IP blocks in your mail server and not in your web server. If the IP block can't use e-mail responsibly, I see no reason to let them be a part of my section of the e-mail chain. It's my house, and if I don't want to let you in, I'm not going to. All the better if I actually have a good reason to keep you out, such as your past abusive behavior.
The Internet's not some big, hippy love-in where we have to be completely tolerant of every imbecile's idiotic behavior just to avoid confrontation. Stomp on my toes, I'll break your nose. Deal with it.
Except, it's more like buying a box of lucky charms expecting to find marshmallows and the regular oats (or whatever it is) cereal and finding a bunch of dirty needles in it as well. SPAM is not supposed to be a part of the web. It's an unwelcome, criminal blight on it and it's being perpetrated by people who are actively trying to ruin a good thing for everyone else. I find it perfectly acceptable that these people be relegated to their own corner and thrown off the web.
NEW STARBUCKS OPENS IN RESTROOM OF EXISTING STARBUCKS
CAMBRIDGE, MA -- Starbucks, the nation's largest coffee-shop chain, continued its rapid expansion Tuesday, opening its newest location in the men's room of an existing Starbucks.
"Coffee lovers just can't stand being far from their favorite Starbucks gourmet blends," said Chris Tuttle, Starbucks vice-president of franchising. "Now, people can enjoy a delicious Frappuccino or espresso just about any time they please...."
The new men's-room-based Starbucks, the coffee giant's 1,531st U.S. location, will be open to both men and women when not "in use." In addition to offering specialty coffees from around the world, it will serve freshly baked pastries, Italian pannini sandwiches and soups, as well as the rest room's usual selection of toilet paper and soap.
According to Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz, the new location represents the beginning of a long-term expansion plan. "Eventually, Starbucks rest rooms everywhere will sell coffee," Schultz said. "But that ambitious scheme is at least five years down the road. In the meantime, we plan to open an additional location in this Starbucks' ladies' room within months, and are already drafting plans for a fourth restaurant along the corridor leading from the main seating area to the rest rooms. At some point a 'Star-bucks Express' window will eventually open in the walk-in closet of the men's room Starbucks."
What I am saying is that, just because Bush is a Christian who is outspoken about he beliefs in God does not make him a bad president.
That's an acceptable posit, and I didn't say otherwise. In fact, your mistake was in assuming I even HAD an argument. Within the context of my post, I merely pointed out that the g-parent poster to my own was directly lambasting him, humourosly, for taking orders from invisible voices. Considering that context, your post still doesn't relate to mine. It may be on the same line of thinking, but it's still a different topic. I have entirely different, largely unrelated reasons for beleiving the man's out of his skull.
Slashdot Mirror
For the love of.....
How is this a "Freedom of Speech" issue, exactly? What, are they going to start broadcasting your voice recordings with their audio flag now? That doesn't even consider the fact that the RIAA is under no obligation to let you speak freely within their domain. And, of course, if you're not talking about rights here, the whole statement was totally off the wall since NOBODY is obligated to let you speak freely otherwise.
Keep it within the proper context, please. We don't need frothing loons talking about free speech issues in a consumer rights situation. Besides, it's still a capitalist system - just stop listening to their music. I'm sure that since the rest of the ignorant public is so concerned about these issues the way that all these screaming Slashbots are, the boycott will take off "Real Soon Now" anyway.
Free speech my ass...
To them it's like game over on a console.
That's EXACTLY what came to mind when I read that. Imagine - you're steering this car through a little 3d raceway. The ability for abuse is mind boggling, but, what's worse, is it sort of removes the element of threat and leaves the "driver" in a more detached position. When you drive your own vehicle, your skin is on the line. When someone else drives your vehicle, they don't have that issue.
I could see some idiot putting the car on cruise control remotely (either through poor design or as a hack to the vehicle/controller) and getting up to go get a pepsi or a beer or something.... just not a good situation.
Not to go about trying to legitamize the booger-flinging little brats that run around ripping off songs on p2p and ruining a good thing for everyone else, but how, exactly, do you propose that we reward good behavior when there isn't any around? The problem here is that there are so many ridiculously deep levels of the RIAA that, even with ongoing lists of tainted labels, it's almost impossible to keep up with what is and what isn't poisoned by the RIAA's presence. Even individual bands flipping between labels can confuse matters. My KMFDM collection is clean so far, but I won't finish up the rest of it because some of the later albums aren't. What now?
This problem extends beyond the RIAA too. Where do I go for high speed internet? I can get *DSL from Verizon, but they're pure evil, and I can get cable from Adelphia, but they're staffed entirely by morons and escapees from a Down's Syndrome group home.
With the conglomerates and monopolies overrunning government policy makers and quietly spreading their tendrils through previously independant operations, it's almost impossible to find any "good behavior" in a company in this country anymore, and I can't afford the higher prices of little local mom and pops (beause, despite what many, many very stupid people say, the economy is still a shithole).
It's hard to reward good behavior when there isn't any....
What, you think they wouldn't if they could? They were beaten to the punch on all the worthwhile patents. The only reason they don't run around slapping people with patent infringement claims is that they know they're on shaky ground in that department, and that's probably one weak spot that Microsoft couldn't throw enough money at to become an industry leader in.
Turns out two of the girls pc's that I fixed very spotted in an episode of Girls Gone Wild.
Only on Slashdot would you find a group of people that could watch GGW and spot a PC they recognize instead of a girl....
Geeks must like trucks. I saw a bumper sticker with that and the "replace you with a very small shell script" joke on the back window of a souped-up F-150. I've seen similar geekiness on other trucks.
It was very confusing to me - seeing a giant-ass jacked up rumbling truck with an NRA sticker and a peeing calvin on one side and "shell script" and "read your e-mail" stickers on the other.
Note: sarcasm. Lots.
Hmmm, yes. Let's latch on to one complaint that I have about PDFs - the crappy viewer from Adobe - and pretend that that's all of them, indeed, shall we?
On top of that, let's ignore that it put the hooks into IE on its own without asking me, let's just forget the fact that it opened in the background behind the IE window instead of overtop of it, and let's just ignore the inconvenient point that this was the first notice that came up since I installed the software, so I had no reason to go wandering about the preferences to turn off a "feature" that insists on tossing itself in your face by default without notice. Good idea. This way, we can blame the user for the fact that Acrobat Reader is a piece of shit instead of just accepting that Acrobat Reader is a piece of shit and PDF files are the wrong format to distribute web content in (for reasons entirely unrelated to Acrobat Reader). Of course, it all makes sense now!
Then, let's make up some irrational, unrelated bullshit about security and act like that has anything at all to do with my dislike of Acrobat Reader!
My god, man! You're some sort of genius, able to define reality simply by making it up as you go!
Uh... great. It looks like you got the HEAD response from my personal site. So?
Although, as I've ranted about before, the clueless dolts have no clue what they're talking about anyway. We've been using Perl for 2+ years at my instigation and it's run circles around that ASP garbage we have. I also got IT to install Apache HTTPD on my box for testing and design purposes. Technically, however, our corporate policy is that "free software .. is a liability".
Stop being a raving, lunatic fanboy. It's the legal department's fault I'm not allowed to use them ("...determined that free software is a liability and is not really free...") and the IT group will have my head on a plate if I abuse my admin privilege on this box and install one anyway.
Now then, fanboy, why don't you ask what I use at home where I have complete control of my systems?
I LOATHE Acrobat Reader, yes, but I also hate pdf files. I'm not even that big a fan of xpdf (not that that's an option at work anyway). I have yet to see anything being distributed via pdf that couldn't have been distributed as plain text or, if it required diagrams and such, HTML. pdf is like taking a nice, clean HTML document and turning it into a gigantic, unmanageable, honking piece of crap. Little point indeed.
PDF, flash, and java applets are the worst file formats ever inflicted on the web/Internet in the name of substandardization...
I second the HTML version. Good old Adobe - popped up a nice little window in the background bugging me to update and stalled the IE process. Since the window went to the background, all I could see was the stalled process, and I killed IE, which, of course, closed all my windows. I hate pdf files...
Anyway, here's a consideratoin: semi-disgruntled employees. For example, I'm not disloyal enough to actively seek to damage the company's systems or information, but with the way they treat employees, and the way my dysfunctional department operates, I'm not loyal enough to sit and try to think of strong passwords every month. So, I come up with creative ways to circumvent the draconian password policy instead. Ironically, some of my stronger passwords have been defeated by this overly strict ruleset and wound up with me simply appending a character to a weaker password to get around it.
The lesson: draconian password policies hurt security and audit your password lists on a regular basis (at least randomly sample them regularly). Most of your users probably don't give a crap about their passwords because they don't give a crap about what happens to the company's systems and information.
So, basically, you're saying that Slashdot is impenetrable?
Caffeine is a device that turns coders into caffiene joke posters on Slashdot.
Coincidence that 10 year old girls have C cup's now ?
You've been researching this? So... where do you live, again? I... uh... just wanted to... mm... send a.. uh.. pizza.... not the police or anything.
My point is: I see way too many people relying on praying and such while completely ignoring regular medical stuff which may be their only help
Then, maybe you should have said that instead of being an asswipe to someone who just found it appropriate to speak their mind? Just a thought...
What if that's not the point? What then?
First of all, if there are 120,000 people in this country that are really terrorists that are that easy to spot, we're already up shit creek and the paddle's still back on the shore. Second, I don't know about you, but when people start getting scored on their "terrorism quotient", I get a little scared about what my tax dollars are paying to do to me. I'm all for identifying REAL terrorists and going out and getting them, but I'd sure like to know that they aren't "real" just because they got a high score one some stupid spook's spreadsheet.
I hope there's a curve.
Yea, I know. I considered posting a response noting my misuse of the word, but then decided not to because of the 2 minute flood control message.
You got the point though.
Oh baloney. There are a bunch of open relays in China, so block them. If the admin's too dumb to close the relay, that's the admin's problem and we shouldn't suffer for their inability to maintain their server properly. In fact, I support blacklisting ANY open relay that's being used by spammers regardless of what country it's in.
Besides, you don't have to block them altogether. You can blacklist the IP blocks in your mail server and not in your web server. If the IP block can't use e-mail responsibly, I see no reason to let them be a part of my section of the e-mail chain. It's my house, and if I don't want to let you in, I'm not going to. All the better if I actually have a good reason to keep you out, such as your past abusive behavior.
The Internet's not some big, hippy love-in where we have to be completely tolerant of every imbecile's idiotic behavior just to avoid confrontation. Stomp on my toes, I'll break your nose. Deal with it.
Except, it's more like buying a box of lucky charms expecting to find marshmallows and the regular oats (or whatever it is) cereal and finding a bunch of dirty needles in it as well. SPAM is not supposed to be a part of the web. It's an unwelcome, criminal blight on it and it's being perpetrated by people who are actively trying to ruin a good thing for everyone else. I find it perfectly acceptable that these people be relegated to their own corner and thrown off the web.
Don't screw it up? DON'T SCREW IT UP!?
DID YOU WATCH THE LAST TWO MOVIES!? DID YOU READ THE PART OF THE ARTICLE THAT SAYS SURFING ON LAVA!?
The only way this could not be screwed up is if the lava is real, Lucas is the surfboard, and he does his own damn stunts.
Bring on the Metroid Pr0ne!
Uh... you want METROIDS..... PRONE?
You are one sick, sick mofo my friend. The metroids were not, in my book... anything I'd want to have prone...
Stud? Ring?
Wait a minute.... why the hell am I asking for sex advice from someone on Slashdot!?
What I am saying is that, just because Bush is a Christian who is outspoken about he beliefs in God does not make him a bad president.
That's an acceptable posit, and I didn't say otherwise. In fact, your mistake was in assuming I even HAD an argument. Within the context of my post, I merely pointed out that the g-parent poster to my own was directly lambasting him, humourosly, for taking orders from invisible voices. Considering that context, your post still doesn't relate to mine. It may be on the same line of thinking, but it's still a different topic. I have entirely different, largely unrelated reasons for beleiving the man's out of his skull.