the OP inferred that the server was using NTP (i.e., "the correct time")
... and then went on to suppose that interrogating the correct time once and then incrementing it based on a local clock not necessarily closely in step with the correct time is perfectly fine - a strategy you also appear to find no fault with.
I make a distinction between capitalism, which rewards privilege to a large extent, and free enterprise, which rewards industriousness and talent, though itself it makes no provision for hardship.
I am not so sure I see human attitudes in quite so much the dark light that you do. For example, the majority of people will hold the post office door for you rather than let it slam in your face, give you directions rather than ignore you, tip service givers, say please and thank you, give to organized charity as well as occasionally hand a twenty to someone in the gas station with a sad story, etc - not to mention call 911 for an accident victim. OTOH, most people see their business life in a completely different light than their personal life.
Estimation in your head is a valuable talent and not a very difficult one, but calling it guesstimation misses the mark. There is really no place for guesswork in the age of google and the internet, and the process you describe does not even entail guesswork. I really don't know why they don't seem to teach estimation in school any more, but I suppose it's no more crazy than no longer teaching paper and pencil addition, subtraction, multiplication and long division.
Speaking of which, false and stupid precision is REALLY lame, as you point out. Like "We are cruising at an altitude of 33,000 feet, or 10,058.4 metres". Jeeze, just say 10,000 metres.
What I do think is that it is more incumbent on Americans to be polite to the other 95% of the world than it is vice versa. Articles with Imperial units should include the metric equivalents.
Oh come now. Every PC already has a local clock. The only thing that makes sense for the BBC site to do is give you a UTC (GMT if you must) clock. It's basically a tradition of BBC radio. Do you think the BBC radio gives a rundown of every local time in the world? Or do you think it announces "bong. The time is xxx GMT"?
NTP is completely unaware of time zones. It merely syncs unix time, which no matter what the zone is a count of seconds in the epock, related to a UTC start time, 1970-01-01 00:00:00.
The gimmick is that the time presented by the BBC site can be completely independant of how accurate the PC's own clock is.
The only alternative to the dreary yoke of capitalism which you can imagine is force, threat, violence, and submission? But capitalism is already the concentration of wealth into the hands of the privileged.
Capitalism is ownership of the means of production by the privileged few. Socialism is ownership of the means of production by a faceless, merciless central state bureacracy in the name of the people taken as a mass. There is a better way. Distributism is ownership of the means of production spread as widely as possible among the people: individuals and small local cooperatives. Something like a system of guilds replaces the confrontational, adversarial labor unions and vast corporations of capitalism, or the smashing of individual enterprise entailed by socialism.
When people are no longer pitted against other people (capitalism), or against the imposition of mass regimentation (socialism), brotherly love and charity could flourish.
Let those of limited daring and imagination say why we have to submit to terrible, evil systems. The rest of us can dream of a better way and seek to make it happen.
Of course BBC can solve this problem. Othersitessolveit. They all agree within one second of my own system's NTP-synced time.
Try man ntpdate. With the right option it will set your clock one time post haste. It's intended for use at startup, when the clock is discontinuous anyway. Then ntpd can keep it synced.
You could do the equivalent of ntpdate when you load the page, and the equivalent of ntpd while the page is displayed, with the clock updating.
Yes, what NTP does is very nontrivial, but it's a long-solved problem. Pulling the NTP levers using the already-compiled executables is not hard, and rolling your own implementation is not exactly rocket science, since the protocol definition is exhaustively defined and open source implementations are freely available.
I'm not going to do the complete design for you, but just consider, why would they use HTTP?
That would be such a lousy design as to be essentially useless. Offset would drift with time, since you are never resyncing and not correcting for local clock drift in between resyncs.
There is a lot more to determining current UTC than querying a remote server once. Little things like, um, propagation time, which can be substantial depending on internet connection and routing (just imagine the guy on satellite or dial-up). Anyway, thanks to people who actually knew what they were doing decades ago, it's a solved problem. Look up NTP sometime. I bet you could implement a pretty good NTP implementation good to a fraction of a second in Javascript for the poor Windows saps. Of course, anyone with a real OS is already running their internal clock synced via NTP.
Then converting UTC to local time, should you so desire for some weird reason (just about every piece of graphic interface computer equipment already has a local time clock on screen; not so many have a UTC clock, so that would be far more useful) is merely a system call, even in Windows.
What about the right not to have your private thoughts and what you put into your own body presumed, regulated and punished?
Making arbitrarily selected groups of people move to the back of the bus and use segregated drinking fountains and restrooms used to be perfectly OK with US law, too.
I think it' is elementarily obvious that they can ASK you to do anything.
Can they FORCE you to open a safe or unlock a car door? Of course not. They will ask you, but if they have to and they have a warrant, they will just break into it.
I think you would be very hard-pressed indeed to find anyone (at least in the US) who has ever been incarcerated for 50 years for contempt of court. I should be very much interested indeed if you could find such a case. In fact I should be very interested to learn the longest such period on record.
In Chadwick v. Janecka, a US Court of Appeals did rule that poor Chadwick could be held INDEFINITELY under federal law, for refusing an order rendered in a mere civil trial. He was, in fact, incarcerated for no less than 14 years before being eventually freed by a state court.
Tough shit, coppers, not my problem. He wouldn't say that out loud of course. He wouldn't say anything. They can most probably prove the premises belong to him, but for all they KNOW factually, he may have forgotten the passkey, or the vagaries of brain deterioration may have erased it.
The scenario is entirely artificial and fanciful of course. A better scenario is if the premises are wired to self-destruct key evidence on forced entry, and are clearly marked to that effect so no one could say there was reckless endangerment of anyone. Can he be coerced into produced the passkey which will deactivate the self-destruction? I say no. In withholding the passkey, he is not even pro-actively committing any act to obstruct justice. The obstruction occurred before there was any lawful warrant obtained.
Even if that is not so, I am afraid people would misinterpret the clause that says "or... in time of... public danger" to cover just about anything. It is as dangerous as the commerce clause. Both can be interpreted by enemies of liberty to allow jackboots to nose into just about anything.
Whether or not Feldman is toast is irrelevant. If they convict him of having CP, and they do it without violating the Fifth, then kudos to them. The man isn't the issue, the rights are.
You sure do hand out kudos very readily. You left out "AND if he actually did have CP, AND if anyone was actually harmed by HIM in connection with the CP he possessed." I would be fairly generous in what I consider harm, but simply looking at pictures? Not in this world. That is one step away from "feeling something" from a glance at a stranger glimpsed in public.
(1) They thought he possessed CP and tried to make him admit it or prove his own innocence. He refused. The basis of law enforcement does not require the innocent to prove their innocence. Even the UN Declaration of Human Rights affirms that. Then before you can say Jack Robinson, Lo and behold! Look what we found! This proves he possessed CP! You will excuse me if I doubt the authenticity of what they "found".
(2) Simple possession of CP is a thought crime. To burning hell with anybody anywhere involved in punishing thought crimes; and to anyone who does not have a problem with others punishing thought crimes, I consider you wrong on a critical point of elementary morality.
(3) If they think he did actual harm to anyone by doing more than simply possessing CP, let them prove that without spitting on his unalienable rights. I think there is more to this case than is apparent, and I think we have a very lazy and arrogant law enforcement apparatus here.
It's not a one PERSON notification law, it's a one PARTY notification law. If you're not a PARTY TO THE CONVERSATION, i.e. not being talked to, you're not allowed to record the conversation.
Otherwise, you could just tell some troll on Slashdot that you were going to record someone, and then go do it, and privacy laws would never protect anyone.
Your post is completely incomprehensible. You start out on the right track and then go completely off the rails. I'll spell it out for you so you can understand. Assume we have a one party notify jurisdiction. Joe and Harry are the two parties. They are talking to each other. Tom is in a position to record the conversation. He tells Joe he is going to do so, then goes ahead and records. He has fulfilled the law in that jurisdictionb (absent other provisions of course). Tom has told Joe so Tom does not have to tell Harry. Joe might tell Harry, or he might not. The law does not say either Tom or Joe has to tell Harry.
Does it sound like a dumbass law? You bet it does. A both party notify law makes more sense. But it is what it is. Take it up with the legislature.
For me. I couldn't care less what the majority of desktop users care about. What I care about is a CPU with high performance per watt and graphics good enough to scroll a text display (editor, eclipse) with some graphics (browser) fast enough not to be annoying, and to watch HD video without any pauses. Sandy bridge was more than good enough in the graphics department for anything I would ever want to do on current displays. Haswell will probably more than maintain this on the highest resolution displays coming down the road in the next few years.
Dollar cheapness of the CPU within limits does not impress me at all. I am generally content with a system for at least 4 years to spread out that cost, and there are many other cost centers in a system besides CPU.
I have never used a single AMD system and see no reason to believe that they will ever make anything that would change my mind.
I don't really begrudge any slack jawed gamers their massive nuclear power plant busting AMD systems with the absurd overkill of space heater SLI graphics; it's just not anything that has the slightest relevance to anything I could ever care about.
Oh come now. journalctl is nothing but a tool to format up a snapshot of the journal so it looks like a proper ASCII logfile. The stuff is logged in binary. And the point that if you are doing forensics you have to find the RIGHT VERSION of journalctl to parse the binary files is well taken.
You do have a good point that you can run journald and syslogd in parallel. That is actually quite cool.
Forcing upgrades of isolated components by defeating dependency locks is about the worst of all possible ideas, and most particularly so in what is after all an enterprise quality desktop. I would certainly slap anybody who tried that crap on my system, and I wouldn't support anybody who was determined to do it on their own system. My comment would be "bad idea; you will be sorry, end of discussion".
As for tossing additional versions of glib2 and gtk2 into the system, you can't do that using yum, which is the only proper way to install things, you can't even do it legitimately with rpm. You would have to compile from source and install manually. Did you ever look at the file list in gtk2-2.18.9-12.el6.x86_64.rpm? It contains 332 files, and none of the.so's contain "2.18.anything" in their pathnames.
This is not as easy as you claim, and I highly doubt you ever did exactly this.
At least before systemd, even if NetworkManager is installed for whatever reasoin, all you have to do is "service NetworkManager stop" and "chkconfig NetworkManager off". If this, or the equivalent, has become impossible, then Houston we have a problem, but I have no reason to believe it has become impossible. I certainly never had a problem yet disabling it.
I.e., why get all OCD just because NetworkManager might be present? It's not like systemd, which THOU WILL USE due to stupid runtime dependency decisions.
Slashdot Mirror
I make a distinction between capitalism, which rewards privilege to a large extent, and free enterprise, which rewards industriousness and talent, though itself it makes no provision for hardship.
I am not so sure I see human attitudes in quite so much the dark light that you do. For example, the majority of people will hold the post office door for you rather than let it slam in your face, give you directions rather than ignore you, tip service givers, say please and thank you, give to organized charity as well as occasionally hand a twenty to someone in the gas station with a sad story, etc - not to mention call 911 for an accident victim. OTOH, most people see their business life in a completely different light than their personal life.
Estimation in your head is a valuable talent and not a very difficult one, but calling it guesstimation misses the mark. There is really no place for guesswork in the age of google and the internet, and the process you describe does not even entail guesswork. I really don't know why they don't seem to teach estimation in school any more, but I suppose it's no more crazy than no longer teaching paper and pencil addition, subtraction, multiplication and long division.
Speaking of which, false and stupid precision is REALLY lame, as you point out. Like "We are cruising at an altitude of 33,000 feet, or 10,058.4 metres". Jeeze, just say 10,000 metres.
What I do think is that it is more incumbent on Americans to be polite to the other 95% of the world than it is vice versa. Articles with Imperial units should include the metric equivalents.
Not really. 1 litre = 0.264172 US gal or 0.219969 Imperial gal, not 0.25 gal.
Not really. 1 ft = 0.3048 m. 2750 ft = 838.2 m, not 916.667 m.
Oh come now. Every PC already has a local clock. The only thing that makes sense for the BBC site to do is give you a UTC (GMT if you must) clock. It's basically a tradition of BBC radio. Do you think the BBC radio gives a rundown of every local time in the world? Or do you think it announces "bong. The time is xxx GMT"?
NTP is completely unaware of time zones. It merely syncs unix time, which no matter what the zone is a count of seconds in the epock, related to a UTC start time, 1970-01-01 00:00:00.
The gimmick is that the time presented by the BBC site can be completely independant of how accurate the PC's own clock is.
The only alternative to the dreary yoke of capitalism which you can imagine is force, threat, violence, and submission? But capitalism is already the concentration of wealth into the hands of the privileged.
Capitalism is ownership of the means of production by the privileged few. Socialism is ownership of the means of production by a faceless, merciless central state bureacracy in the name of the people taken as a mass. There is a better way. Distributism is ownership of the means of production spread as widely as possible among the people: individuals and small local cooperatives. Something like a system of guilds replaces the confrontational, adversarial labor unions and vast corporations of capitalism, or the smashing of individual enterprise entailed by socialism.
When people are no longer pitted against other people (capitalism), or against the imposition of mass regimentation (socialism), brotherly love and charity could flourish.
Let those of limited daring and imagination say why we have to submit to terrible, evil systems. The rest of us can dream of a better way and seek to make it happen.
Of course BBC can solve this problem. Other sites solve it. They all agree within one second of my own system's NTP-synced time.
Try man ntpdate. With the right option it will set your clock one time post haste. It's intended for use at startup, when the clock is discontinuous anyway. Then ntpd can keep it synced.
You could do the equivalent of ntpdate when you load the page, and the equivalent of ntpd while the page is displayed, with the clock updating.
Yes, what NTP does is very nontrivial, but it's a long-solved problem. Pulling the NTP levers using the already-compiled executables is not hard, and rolling your own implementation is not exactly rocket science, since the protocol definition is exhaustively defined and open source implementations are freely available.
I'm not going to do the complete design for you, but just consider, why would they use HTTP?
That would be such a lousy design as to be essentially useless. Offset would drift with time, since you are never resyncing and not correcting for local clock drift in between resyncs.
There is a lot more to determining current UTC than querying a remote server once. Little things like, um, propagation time, which can be substantial depending on internet connection and routing (just imagine the guy on satellite or dial-up). Anyway, thanks to people who actually knew what they were doing decades ago, it's a solved problem. Look up NTP sometime. I bet you could implement a pretty good NTP implementation good to a fraction of a second in Javascript for the poor Windows saps. Of course, anyone with a real OS is already running their internal clock synced via NTP.
Then converting UTC to local time, should you so desire for some weird reason (just about every piece of graphic interface computer equipment already has a local time clock on screen; not so many have a UTC clock, so that would be far more useful) is merely a system call, even in Windows.
Jeeze. Too hard to read the TZ environment variable? Anybody who doesn't have that set properly doesn't deserve to know what time it is.
Not that knowing the timezone alone tells you the local time offset from UTC at any time of the year ... but that's another matter ...
Damn right! And it's 24 hour and has seconds too.
Non sequitur. You pose deadly force; my scenario had none. You intend harm; I intend none.
My property, my protection. I told you there were suitable warnings posted to protect against reckless endangerment.
What about the right not to have your private thoughts and what you put into your own body presumed, regulated and punished?
Making arbitrarily selected groups of people move to the back of the bus and use segregated drinking fountains and restrooms used to be perfectly OK with US law, too.
I think it' is elementarily obvious that they can ASK you to do anything.
Can they FORCE you to open a safe or unlock a car door? Of course not. They will ask you, but if they have to and they have a warrant, they will just break into it.
I think you would be very hard-pressed indeed to find anyone (at least in the US) who has ever been incarcerated for 50 years for contempt of court. I should be very much interested indeed if you could find such a case. In fact I should be very interested to learn the longest such period on record.
In Chadwick v. Janecka, a US Court of Appeals did rule that poor Chadwick could be held INDEFINITELY under federal law, for refusing an order rendered in a mere civil trial. He was, in fact, incarcerated for no less than 14 years before being eventually freed by a state court.
Tough shit, coppers, not my problem. He wouldn't say that out loud of course. He wouldn't say anything. They can most probably prove the premises belong to him, but for all they KNOW factually, he may have forgotten the passkey, or the vagaries of brain deterioration may have erased it.
The scenario is entirely artificial and fanciful of course. A better scenario is if the premises are wired to self-destruct key evidence on forced entry, and are clearly marked to that effect so no one could say there was reckless endangerment of anyone. Can he be coerced into produced the passkey which will deactivate the self-destruction? I say no. In withholding the passkey, he is not even pro-actively committing any act to obstruct justice. The obstruction occurred before there was any lawful warrant obtained.
No offence, but how does it feel to be deciding how many angels can dance on the head of that pin?
Even if that is not so, I am afraid people would misinterpret the clause that says "or ... in time of ... public danger" to cover just about anything. It is as dangerous as the commerce clause. Both can be interpreted by enemies of liberty to allow jackboots to nose into just about anything.
You sure do hand out kudos very readily. You left out "AND if he actually did have CP, AND if anyone was actually harmed by HIM in connection with the CP he possessed." I would be fairly generous in what I consider harm, but simply looking at pictures? Not in this world. That is one step away from "feeling something" from a glance at a stranger glimpsed in public.
(1) They thought he possessed CP and tried to make him admit it or prove his own innocence. He refused. The basis of law enforcement does not require the innocent to prove their innocence. Even the UN Declaration of Human Rights affirms that. Then before you can say Jack Robinson, Lo and behold! Look what we found! This proves he possessed CP! You will excuse me if I doubt the authenticity of what they "found".
(2) Simple possession of CP is a thought crime. To burning hell with anybody anywhere involved in punishing thought crimes; and to anyone who does not have a problem with others punishing thought crimes, I consider you wrong on a critical point of elementary morality.
(3) If they think he did actual harm to anyone by doing more than simply possessing CP, let them prove that without spitting on his unalienable rights. I think there is more to this case than is apparent, and I think we have a very lazy and arrogant law enforcement apparatus here.
Your post is completely incomprehensible. You start out on the right track and then go completely off the rails. I'll spell it out for you so you can understand. Assume we have a one party notify jurisdiction. Joe and Harry are the two parties. They are talking to each other. Tom is in a position to record the conversation. He tells Joe he is going to do so, then goes ahead and records. He has fulfilled the law in that jurisdictionb (absent other provisions of course). Tom has told Joe so Tom does not have to tell Harry. Joe might tell Harry, or he might not. The law does not say either Tom or Joe has to tell Harry.
Does it sound like a dumbass law? You bet it does. A both party notify law makes more sense. But it is what it is. Take it up with the legislature.
For me. I couldn't care less what the majority of desktop users care about. What I care about is a CPU with high performance per watt and graphics good enough to scroll a text display (editor, eclipse) with some graphics (browser) fast enough not to be annoying, and to watch HD video without any pauses. Sandy bridge was more than good enough in the graphics department for anything I would ever want to do on current displays. Haswell will probably more than maintain this on the highest resolution displays coming down the road in the next few years.
Dollar cheapness of the CPU within limits does not impress me at all. I am generally content with a system for at least 4 years to spread out that cost, and there are many other cost centers in a system besides CPU.
I have never used a single AMD system and see no reason to believe that they will ever make anything that would change my mind.
I don't really begrudge any slack jawed gamers their massive nuclear power plant busting AMD systems with the absurd overkill of space heater SLI graphics; it's just not anything that has the slightest relevance to anything I could ever care about.
Oh come now. journalctl is nothing but a tool to format up a snapshot of the journal so it looks like a proper ASCII logfile. The stuff is logged in binary. And the point that if you are doing forensics you have to find the RIGHT VERSION of journalctl to parse the binary files is well taken.
You do have a good point that you can run journald and syslogd in parallel. That is actually quite cool.
Forcing upgrades of isolated components by defeating dependency locks is about the worst of all possible ideas, and most particularly so in what is after all an enterprise quality desktop. I would certainly slap anybody who tried that crap on my system, and I wouldn't support anybody who was determined to do it on their own system. My comment would be "bad idea; you will be sorry, end of discussion".
As for tossing additional versions of glib2 and gtk2 into the system, you can't do that using yum, which is the only proper way to install things, you can't even do it legitimately with rpm. You would have to compile from source and install manually. Did you ever look at the file list in gtk2-2.18.9-12.el6.x86_64.rpm? It contains 332 files, and none of the .so's contain "2.18.anything" in their pathnames.
This is not as easy as you claim, and I highly doubt you ever did exactly this.
That addresses Gnome3. Now how to propose to address the hell of systemd?
At least before systemd, even if NetworkManager is installed for whatever reasoin, all you have to do is "service NetworkManager stop" and "chkconfig NetworkManager off". If this, or the equivalent, has become impossible, then Houston we have a problem, but I have no reason to believe it has become impossible. I certainly never had a problem yet disabling it.
I.e., why get all OCD just because NetworkManager might be present? It's not like systemd, which THOU WILL USE due to stupid runtime dependency decisions.