Gladly. In fact, I'll make sure I'm in whatever floor the plane hits and I'll watch the fucking thing come in. I'll lament the fact that I'm going to die and all that I'll miss, but I'll be glad that I at least got to die a free man instead of living my miserable life as a sniveling coward hiding under a safety blanket of artificial security.
See, what so many of those people who piss their pants every time the Bullshit Rainbow changes don't seem to understand is that the reason that we got this country is that people were willing to die for the ideals that it promises. We may not be perfect, but the people that really get it are willing to try, and we're sure as fuck not going to roll over our freedom just so a bunch of whiny crybabies can pretend their government could actually protect them anyway. Welcome to America. Please enjoy your stay on the bones of all those people who weren't afraid to fight and die for it and for you.
I've considered that myself. While past presidents have certainly worked to erode rights in some areas (Clinton and the DMCA anyone), it usually was for the purpose of giving their palm-greasing pals something in return for buying their position. This guy, however, got the deal of a lifetime. Not only can he run roughshod over the public, environment, foreign policy, and everything else for the purpose of special interest and buddy-pal-ol-boy appeasement, he got the opportunity to use the single worst terrorst attack on U.S. soil in history to go play god with everything else. For awhile there, the answer to everything, no matter how idiotic it seemed, was "9/11 this" and "terrorism that". There are still people, more than 2 years later, running and hiding under their beds every time the president says that magic word: "terrorists".
If he is reelected, the only thing he has to fear is retribution from the laws of the land. However, with the introduction of things like PATRIOT, and talk of amending the constitution on a whim, he's suggested that maybe even that can't stop him.
However, even if the Administration does get reelected, there is still hope. A lot of members of Congress have been sitting up lately and taking notice to what's going on. The Republican controlled Congress wants to help its Republican president, but they're also starting to say "look, this is just too much".
Still, I'm hoping he's gone in November, and I'm terrified of what may happen if he's not... fewer and fewer people are laughing at me like I'm a looney tune now when I say I'm more scared of my own governments than any boogey-man terrorists...
You have posted a response to one of my comments as an Anonymous Coward. The only legitimate reason to post as an anonymous coward is to protect your identity when relaying potentially comprising information. Your post does not meet that requirement, so you are receiving this pre-fabricated response.
Your post is:
[ ] An emotionally charged, possibly irrational response. [x] Attempting to call bullshit on my post. [x] Attempting to refute information in my post logically and intelligently. [ ] A troll.
My response is:
[ ] You have a good point. Thanks for responding. [x] You are misunderstanding the original post. [ ] You are wrong. [ ] Your information is wrong. [x] You are posting an opinion as fact, so you are wrong. [ ] Grow up. [x] You MIGHT have a point, but you're a chickenshit AC, so probably not. [ ] FOAD, troll.
Other readers should:
[ ] Use the parent link of this post to read yours. [x] Ignore you. [ ] Flame you for fun and profit.
Moderators may optionally be instructed to:
[ ] Mod your post up. [ ] Mod your post down. [x] Ignore your post.
In addition, this is what I think of you personally:
[ ] You made an interesting point and I wish I could verify your posts over time. [ ] Your post was stupid, and you are obviously a stupid person. [x] I have no opinion on you.
You have posted a response to one of my comments as an Anonymous Coward. The only legitimate reason to post as an anonymous coward is to protect your identity when relaying potentially comprising information. Your post does not meet that requirement, so you are receiving this pre-fabricated response.
Your post is:
[ ] An emotionally charged, possibly irrational response. [x] Attempting to call bullshit on my post. [ ] Attempting to refute information in my post logically and intelligently. [ ] A troll.
My response is:
[ ] You have a good point. Thanks for responding. [x] You are misunderstanding the original post. [ ] You are wrong. [ ] Your information is wrong. [x] You are posting an opinion as fact, so you are wrong. [ ] Grow up. [x] You MIGHT have a point, but you're a chickenshit AC, so probably not. [ ] FOAD, troll.
Other readers should:
[ ] Use the parent link of this post to read yours. [ ] Ignore you. [x] Flame you for fun and profit.
Moderators may optionally be instructed to:
[ ] Mod your post up. [ ] Mod your post down. [x] Ignore your post.
In addition, this is what I think of you personally:
[ ] You made an interesting point and I wish I could verify your posts over time. [x] Your post was stupid, and you are obviously a stupid person.
Quit posting AC, chickenshit. If you have something to hide in this "discussion", you're just an imbecile with no convictions and there's nothing here to discuss.
Now then, if I were interested in learning the tenets of a nasty little cult that refuses to let people know them who haven't already joined, you'd have a point. However, since I'm of the opinion that anyone who would start a "religion" and then actively attempt to keep its information concealed is completely full of shit, and that's what I'm inviting you to respond to, I don't see how knowing any of those things is relevant. When I come back and argue about the content of the cult, fine, go wild. Until then, however, you're full of shit, and so are all the scientologists.
Not to be a math nazi... but to just squeeze out the minimal qualification of "hundreds" of errors per page, assuming you're speaking at the granularity of single words (since that's the granularity spell checks work at), you'd have to have 1000 words per page. I doubt most professional documents would have that many words per page (and you'd have to do it at an 8 point font to make it happen anyway), so it may be of some use after all, especially where accuracy is less important, or the documents are small. If it had other benefits, they may well override the low accuracy rate.
Most people here, these days, probably don't even remember the squabble over the scientology post.
Thing is, however, the reader posted a chunk of copyrighted text (who the hell copyrights their own religion?) and the scientologists used the DMCA to cut it down.
You, on the other hand, merely pointed out that the scientologists are, in yours, and mine, and pretty much all sane people's opinions, a bunch of babbling loons.
If anyone from the church of scientology would like to contact me and try to argue against my opinion, my e-mail address is available with this post (a package deal!). Feel free. I need a good laugh.
1834 rings a bell actually.... it's 1834cc size engines, I assume... maybe that was the size of those stupid old I4 turbo Mustangs Ford made in the mid 80s when they tried to kill it off and replace it with the Probe.
Way to add value to the comments page, Jim Dandy. Some folks may tell you the mods are here to keep the signal to noise ratio high, but don't you let that slow your braindead attempt at dragging us all down into a self-masturbatory mindrot with you.
Y'know, you could probably swap a Chrysler 360 into that thing with a little ingenuity and the savings in gas would pay for the job *. Plus, you could pretend you were driving an '89 Viper Concept.... a... really..... ugly.. Viper Concept.
* Yes, I'm aware that you're not really going to save $3500 in gas...
To get that bad of gas mileage, and to have a turbo, you either have to be driving an exotic (high end Porsche, maybe?), driving a HIGHLY tuned vehicle, driving like a maniac, or driving a car with something wrong with it.
Care to pick the appropriate answer(s) for those inquiring minds out there?
I drive a 2001 Mustang GT. I get about 17 mpg in it. I like it a lot more than your SL2, because it has WAY WAY WAY more power, plus I get lots of looks from hot college chicks.
...... I'm probably gonna get killed by an environmentalist now.... go pick on a Viper owner instead.... they're much worse...
First of all, pick a thought and stick with it. I don't know if you're whining about internal affairs, foreign policy, dictatorships, the President, or outsourcing.
Second, I don't see how you're going to tie stupid foriegn policy to losses of internal freedoms on an ongoing basis ("Do not attribute to malice what can easily be explained by ignorance"). While there are close ties between the two within the last 3 years, part of what made the world hate us so much is that for the decade prior to fall 2001, the American people shoved their heads right up their bums and didn't WANT to know anything about foreign policy. Most of the egregious abuses of internal freedom during the Clinton era were in the form of consumers getting the shaft for the benefit of companies.
Third, while many people within Bush's sad sack administration may have played roles in Saddam and/or the Taliban, etc., Bush wasn't among that group of people fifteen years ago. While I'm certainly all for voting him out, it's his administration that is really doing almost all the damage around the world, not him personally, and you can't vote for them. In fact, the people poised to do the most harm to our freedom are, coincidentally, the people who DON'T get voted in. That's the point of figureheads. They make people think that they have representation while the real players pull strings behind the curtains. You never noticed?
No, not grep (unless you're using 'grepped' as a general verb substitute for 'searched').
They make a perfect bit copy of the hard drive, a la dd(), without even booting the system. After that, the drive is usually searched in it's raw form for the various byte strings that identify the file type in the header using either a specialized forensic tool, or a standard raw disk read/write application.
Why, yes, I *have* done it, and it IS boring if you do it manually....
Yea, go ahead tough guy. I find it more than exceptionally unlikely that anything "you might have done" is anything compared to what I can and will do in the unlikely even you really did do something you "might have done". Unless you planned on shooting me or something since I'm pretty certain I can't outfight a bullet. Kind of takes the wind out of those reasonability sails and puts it into the lunatic sails, doesn't it, pal?
You cannot have a reasoned argument with the kind of people that still support Bush.
So, your solution is to come into the middle of a thread that you have nothing to add to and post totally offtopic gibberish that doesn't even make a logical, rational point? Yea, the rational people pay attention to that sort of irrational behavior all the time, right?
You're either completely nuts or clueless. For your sake, I hope it's the latter, and I hope you find a clue, because the only thing you'll ever manage to do with this sort of behavior is make the "reasonable people" think YOU'RE just as irrational as the people you purport to oppose. On top of that, go read my fucking journal once before talking to me about Bush. Congratulations on making me, one of the people who want Bush out of office as soon as is humanly possible, into one of your enemies. That's the true mark of a rational man, isn't it?
Do you know why so many Bush supporters won't listen to me? Because morons like you inject vague, emotional statements like that into the flow of a discussion where they're totally offtopic.
Get a clue and get a fucking grip on your position. If you want Bush out, fine, but keep it within the proper confines of a structured political debate. You're totally out in left field (no pun intended) and you're making people that actually know WHY they want him gone look like you - a frothing luncatic spouting random gibberish.
People get murdered all the time. I don't see what the big deal is if I run them down with my car.
Good one - trying to justify your destruction of public property based on the stupidity and callousness of other people. I guess the thought never crossed you mind that YOU are destroying the property, and therefore all of Iraq is completely irrelevant to this discussion? Or, are you saying that you're destroying property in Iraq? Or, wait - maybe you're saying that the destruction of public property in Iraq somehow forces you to destroy things here?
No no... I've got it now: you just haven't got a leg to stand on so you're trying to justify your illegitimate actions on things that are completely unrelated. I'm sorry, which one of us needs a clue?
There we go - the heart of your post, and my original point. The problem isn't that people don't switch, the problem, as originally stated, is that people keep making up assinine excuses to not even consider it.
Most of your post is responding to my responses to the AC, but that's skewing your perspective on what I'm actually saying. My point isn't that everyone needs to rush to Linux, it's that the jackasses in charge need to stop making up irrational bullshit just to stonewall tests, reviews, etc.
And, no. If you slim Linux down to what users need in the workplace, it's not hard. There's still "icons", "Start menus", "desktops", "screensavers" blah blah blah. The complexity in most distributions is just the result of a fanatical insistence on installing everything and the kitchen sink in default installs. Slim one down to OOo, Evolution, and any special tools the user may need, and it's no more complex an experience than Windows. Geeks always forget that Linux CAN be complex because we're there typing out 790 character command line strings and using bizarre commands like C-c C-x to close our text editors. It doesn't HAVE to be like that, and the overwhelming majority of business users never even have to know emacs or vi even exist.
Continuing on, the point about HR was that if you have so many receptionists that training all of them could offset benefits to the rest of the company, then you almost certainly have too many receptionists.
On top of all that, I failed to notice when it became contingent on whether employees wanted software or not as to whether they got it or not. We had a lot of problems with dolts who couldn't figure out the changes in XP from NT 4 at first, but when they finally had to choose between continuing to whine about it and getting fired for not doing their jobs, or buckling down and figuring it out, they all buckled down. Sure, with Linux you'll need to do some basic instruction, but only because people insist on resisting any tiny change, not because it's hard. If they have to, they'll learn, and if it's in the companies best interest to make them learn, they better damn well do it.
The work of managers is way too complex to be solved by making harsh changes in the way your employees work or by firing them.
Yea, right. You almost had me. What screwed it up ws when my boss rejected a document I drafted because it wasn't specific enough. I quote the original request:
Draft the information as vaguely as possible. We don't handle the information for [internal system], so we shouldn't try to provide details on it.
Complex? Yea... in the way that trying to pick individual grains of sand out of muddy water is complex, I suppose.
You print them up and start selling them, and I'll be the Evil Monster that sues you later for copyright infringement. When Slashdot picks up the story, we'll put a bunch pay-for-eyes ads on the site and make all our money off a Slashdotting!
Slashdot Mirror
Gladly. In fact, I'll make sure I'm in whatever floor the plane hits and I'll watch the fucking thing come in. I'll lament the fact that I'm going to die and all that I'll miss, but I'll be glad that I at least got to die a free man instead of living my miserable life as a sniveling coward hiding under a safety blanket of artificial security.
See, what so many of those people who piss their pants every time the Bullshit Rainbow changes don't seem to understand is that the reason that we got this country is that people were willing to die for the ideals that it promises. We may not be perfect, but the people that really get it are willing to try, and we're sure as fuck not going to roll over our freedom just so a bunch of whiny crybabies can pretend their government could actually protect them anyway. Welcome to America. Please enjoy your stay on the bones of all those people who weren't afraid to fight and die for it and for you.
I've considered that myself. While past presidents have certainly worked to erode rights in some areas (Clinton and the DMCA anyone), it usually was for the purpose of giving their palm-greasing pals something in return for buying their position. This guy, however, got the deal of a lifetime. Not only can he run roughshod over the public, environment, foreign policy, and everything else for the purpose of special interest and buddy-pal-ol-boy appeasement, he got the opportunity to use the single worst terrorst attack on U.S. soil in history to go play god with everything else. For awhile there, the answer to everything, no matter how idiotic it seemed, was "9/11 this" and "terrorism that". There are still people, more than 2 years later, running and hiding under their beds every time the president says that magic word: "terrorists".
If he is reelected, the only thing he has to fear is retribution from the laws of the land. However, with the introduction of things like PATRIOT, and talk of amending the constitution on a whim, he's suggested that maybe even that can't stop him.
However, even if the Administration does get reelected, there is still hope. A lot of members of Congress have been sitting up lately and taking notice to what's going on. The Republican controlled Congress wants to help its Republican president, but they're also starting to say "look, this is just too much".
Still, I'm hoping he's gone in November, and I'm terrified of what may happen if he's not... fewer and fewer people are laughing at me like I'm a looney tune now when I say I'm more scared of my own governments than any boogey-man terrorists...
I get the distinct feeling this one is going to win it very soon.
In other news, Dewey has been pronounced the winner in a major victory over Harry S. Truman.
It ain't over 'till the fat lady sings :)
Well, yea. But you've got to understand...
...nobody takes the scientologists seriously.
I added it to my template under "My response is...". Is that what you were thinking of?
I promise you ...
Quit posting AC, chickenshit. If you have something to hide in this "discussion", you're just an imbecile with no convictions and there's nothing here to discuss.
Now then, if I were interested in learning the tenets of a nasty little cult that refuses to let people know them who haven't already joined, you'd have a point. However, since I'm of the opinion that anyone who would start a "religion" and then actively attempt to keep its information concealed is completely full of shit, and that's what I'm inviting you to respond to, I don't see how knowing any of those things is relevant. When I come back and argue about the content of the cult, fine, go wild. Until then, however, you're full of shit, and so are all the scientologists.
Not to be a math nazi... but to just squeeze out the minimal qualification of "hundreds" of errors per page, assuming you're speaking at the granularity of single words (since that's the granularity spell checks work at), you'd have to have 1000 words per page. I doubt most professional documents would have that many words per page (and you'd have to do it at an 8 point font to make it happen anyway), so it may be of some use after all, especially where accuracy is less important, or the documents are small. If it had other benefits, they may well override the low accuracy rate.
Anywho, my girlfriend just yelled at me so I needed to vent.
Huh? Quit making up words!
Most people here, these days, probably don't even remember the squabble over the scientology post.
Thing is, however, the reader posted a chunk of copyrighted text (who the hell copyrights their own religion?) and the scientologists used the DMCA to cut it down.
You, on the other hand, merely pointed out that the scientologists are, in yours, and mine, and pretty much all sane people's opinions, a bunch of babbling loons.
If anyone from the church of scientology would like to contact me and try to argue against my opinion, my e-mail address is available with this post (a package deal!). Feel free. I need a good laugh.
1834 rings a bell actually.... it's 1834cc size engines, I assume... maybe that was the size of those stupid old I4 turbo Mustangs Ford made in the mid 80s when they tried to kill it off and replace it with the Probe.
Way to add value to the comments page, Jim Dandy. Some folks may tell you the mods are here to keep the signal to noise ratio high, but don't you let that slow your braindead attempt at dragging us all down into a self-masturbatory mindrot with you.
If you insist on paying for what you can get for free...
Sorry, you lost me on the "screw paying for what you can rip off" line.
Y'know, you could probably swap a Chrysler 360 into that thing with a little ingenuity and the savings in gas would pay for the job *. Plus, you could pretend you were driving an '89 Viper Concept.... a... really..... ugly.. Viper Concept.
* Yes, I'm aware that you're not really going to save $3500 in gas...
You're just mad because you spent forty thousand on a car that doesn't even have cupholders
To get that bad of gas mileage, and to have a turbo, you either have to be driving an exotic (high end Porsche, maybe?), driving a HIGHLY tuned vehicle, driving like a maniac, or driving a car with something wrong with it.
Care to pick the appropriate answer(s) for those inquiring minds out there?
I drive a 2001 Mustang GT. I get about 17 mpg in it. I like it a lot more than your SL2, because it has WAY WAY WAY more power, plus I get lots of looks from hot college chicks.
...... I'm probably gonna get killed by an environmentalist now.... go pick on a Viper owner instead.... they're much worse...
I mod you -1 Unclear Thinking, not -1 Troll.
First of all, pick a thought and stick with it. I don't know if you're whining about internal affairs, foreign policy, dictatorships, the President, or outsourcing.
Second, I don't see how you're going to tie stupid foriegn policy to losses of internal freedoms on an ongoing basis ("Do not attribute to malice what can easily be explained by ignorance"). While there are close ties between the two within the last 3 years, part of what made the world hate us so much is that for the decade prior to fall 2001, the American people shoved their heads right up their bums and didn't WANT to know anything about foreign policy. Most of the egregious abuses of internal freedom during the Clinton era were in the form of consumers getting the shaft for the benefit of companies.
Third, while many people within Bush's sad sack administration may have played roles in Saddam and/or the Taliban, etc., Bush wasn't among that group of people fifteen years ago. While I'm certainly all for voting him out, it's his administration that is really doing almost all the damage around the world, not him personally, and you can't vote for them. In fact, the people poised to do the most harm to our freedom are, coincidentally, the people who DON'T get voted in. That's the point of figureheads. They make people think that they have representation while the real players pull strings behind the curtains. You never noticed?
No, not grep (unless you're using 'grepped' as a general verb substitute for 'searched').
They make a perfect bit copy of the hard drive, a la dd(), without even booting the system. After that, the drive is usually searched in it's raw form for the various byte strings that identify the file type in the header using either a specialized forensic tool, or a standard raw disk read/write application.
Why, yes, I *have* done it, and it IS boring if you do it manually....
Yea, go ahead tough guy. I find it more than exceptionally unlikely that anything "you might have done" is anything compared to what I can and will do in the unlikely even you really did do something you "might have done". Unless you planned on shooting me or something since I'm pretty certain I can't outfight a bullet. Kind of takes the wind out of those reasonability sails and puts it into the lunatic sails, doesn't it, pal?
You cannot have a reasoned argument with the kind of people that still support Bush.
So, your solution is to come into the middle of a thread that you have nothing to add to and post totally offtopic gibberish that doesn't even make a logical, rational point? Yea, the rational people pay attention to that sort of irrational behavior all the time, right?
You're either completely nuts or clueless. For your sake, I hope it's the latter, and I hope you find a clue, because the only thing you'll ever manage to do with this sort of behavior is make the "reasonable people" think YOU'RE just as irrational as the people you purport to oppose. On top of that, go read my fucking journal once before talking to me about Bush. Congratulations on making me, one of the people who want Bush out of office as soon as is humanly possible, into one of your enemies. That's the true mark of a rational man, isn't it?
Do you know why so many Bush supporters won't listen to me? Because morons like you inject vague, emotional statements like that into the flow of a discussion where they're totally offtopic.
Get a clue and get a fucking grip on your position. If you want Bush out, fine, but keep it within the proper confines of a structured political debate. You're totally out in left field (no pun intended) and you're making people that actually know WHY they want him gone look like you - a frothing luncatic spouting random gibberish.
People get murdered all the time. I don't see what the big deal is if I run them down with my car.
Good one - trying to justify your destruction of public property based on the stupidity and callousness of other people. I guess the thought never crossed you mind that YOU are destroying the property, and therefore all of Iraq is completely irrelevant to this discussion? Or, are you saying that you're destroying property in Iraq? Or, wait - maybe you're saying that the destruction of public property in Iraq somehow forces you to destroy things here?
No no... I've got it now: you just haven't got a leg to stand on so you're trying to justify your illegitimate actions on things that are completely unrelated. I'm sorry, which one of us needs a clue?
But is it worth it for your company to do so now?
There we go - the heart of your post, and my original point. The problem isn't that people don't switch, the problem, as originally stated, is that people keep making up assinine excuses to not even consider it.
Most of your post is responding to my responses to the AC, but that's skewing your perspective on what I'm actually saying. My point isn't that everyone needs to rush to Linux, it's that the jackasses in charge need to stop making up irrational bullshit just to stonewall tests, reviews, etc.
And, no. If you slim Linux down to what users need in the workplace, it's not hard. There's still "icons", "Start menus", "desktops", "screensavers" blah blah blah. The complexity in most distributions is just the result of a fanatical insistence on installing everything and the kitchen sink in default installs. Slim one down to OOo, Evolution, and any special tools the user may need, and it's no more complex an experience than Windows. Geeks always forget that Linux CAN be complex because we're there typing out 790 character command line strings and using bizarre commands like C-c C-x to close our text editors. It doesn't HAVE to be like that, and the overwhelming majority of business users never even have to know emacs or vi even exist.
Continuing on, the point about HR was that if you have so many receptionists that training all of them could offset benefits to the rest of the company, then you almost certainly have too many receptionists.
On top of all that, I failed to notice when it became contingent on whether employees wanted software or not as to whether they got it or not. We had a lot of problems with dolts who couldn't figure out the changes in XP from NT 4 at first, but when they finally had to choose between continuing to whine about it and getting fired for not doing their jobs, or buckling down and figuring it out, they all buckled down. Sure, with Linux you'll need to do some basic instruction, but only because people insist on resisting any tiny change, not because it's hard. If they have to, they'll learn, and if it's in the companies best interest to make them learn, they better damn well do it.
The work of managers is way too complex to be solved by making harsh changes in the way your employees work or by firing them.
Yea, right. You almost had me. What screwed it up ws when my boss rejected a document I drafted because it wasn't specific enough. I quote the original request:
Draft the information as vaguely as possible. We don't handle the information for [internal system], so we shouldn't try to provide details on it.
Complex? Yea... in the way that trying to pick individual grains of sand out of muddy water is complex, I suppose.
You print them up and start selling them, and I'll be the Evil Monster that sues you later for copyright infringement. When Slashdot picks up the story, we'll put a bunch pay-for-eyes ads on the site and make all our money off a Slashdotting!
Woohoo! I filled in step 2!