There's always a fascist/statist ready to "balance" my freedom, of this I have no doubt. Everything you will ever do will have some negative impact on someone somewhere, so, hey, lets have the government resolve every one of those instances with a law - what could go wrong?
Then you're not even a libertarian. You're an anarchist.
Life isn't safe, nor should it be.
So if your neighbours choose to have lions freely roaming their grounds, without proper fences, you're OK with that. Well it doesn't matter if you're not OK with it. That's his right. But of course you have your guns. And no one with a gun was ever successful stalked by a lion!
Terrorism has a wide and subjective definition whether you are in NK or the USA.
Did you know that North Korea has a number of pilotless aircraft constantly circling various foreign countries. And from time to time these aircrafts assassinate both NK nationals and foreigners who are deemed to be against North Korea. No trial. No worries about who else might be in the building they destroy. Women and children as well as men.
Come now, a handful of examples, some dating back to 1978. The US has kidnapped hundreds of people from other countries in the last 12 years and are keeping them hostages without trial, and at some points in time used torture on them.
And several of the examples you state are of individuals that have illegally crossed the border into N Korea. The US also arrests people that illegally cross their borders. And whilst many are sent straight back, thousands are in long term detention.
So if you can say that the US is welcoming of foreigners, and treat them well, you can say that of N Korea too. Because in both cases the majority are. And the minority are persecuted.
That article was written by and about Michael Arrington. The biggest drama queen in tech reporting. And not known for honesty. It's not even sure there was a boat, let alone a second officer.
Amen. There's also been lots of talk recently about China hacking into American sites. It's a terrible thing. However America doing cyber intelligence is obviously a good thing. Hypocrites they are.
I would. When was the last time N Korea arrested visitors saying they were CIA spies? On the contrary, N Korea is very welcoming to foreigners, including Americans. It seems they want to impress them, not arrest them. This 3G internet for visitors seems another step in the same direction.
It's their own people they persecute. And the South Koreans, who they consider to be traitors to a unified Korea.
I know several people like you ready to throw away any amount of freedom, no matter how large, for any amount of safety
Freedom has to be balanced. The balance between your freedom to play with guns, against other people's freedom from being shot.
I know entire nations full of rational people that think guns should be very strictly controlled or banned. The US is unusual in it's belief that guns are a right. A brainwashed nation.
I don't know who Sam Harris is, nor the source of his rather odd stat. I could search for it but if you ca't be bothered.... Bit more assaults for less homicides? Of course it's a good trade off.
Trouble with pro-gun types is that they always imagine they'll be the one's shooting, rather than the ones dying. And screw everyone that does die.
Yes I did. Properly. Taking time to find the figures and the quotes from the prime minister of the day. And you don't even remember. Like I said, waste of time.
"you're an idiot, go away, la-la-la I can't hear you."
I would never say that.
Now fuck off, you tedious moron, la-la-la I can't hear you.
... and nothing of value was lost. If every advertising company worker in the world had to go and do something else, or even be unemployed, it would make the world a significantly better place.
If you manually back up regularly. Something I hardly ever do for external drives...
Manually? OSX backs up automatically, every hour. And will include external drives when they're plugged in. Has that functionality not been included in Windows and Linux yet?
Of course you need more total space on your backup drives than the drives you're backing up.
For that, I get to selectively restore any version of any file or set of files from my backups. Does your cloud solution offer that? Or is it just a disaster recovery system?
Carring your external hard drive across a continent and an ocean in your bag and having it be subjected to searches for illegal content when entering certain countries is more convenient than just accessing your files over the web when you get there?
If you have dodgy files, you probably don't want them up on the cloud either.
Personally I'm not always connected to the web, so cloud solutions are worthless to me.
A touchscreen is quicker (if you discount the distance moved from the keyboard) and direct manipulation is more instinctive. Which is why tablets and touchscreen phones have become popular.
However, it's also a lot less accurate. Which is why tablets and phones have big targets for touches.
If the ChromeOS, it's apps and the web pages you use are all designed for touch, then touch will be OK.
Except for the fact that reaching up to touch a laptop screen will be tiring. The screen will tip backwards every time you touch it. And the screen will always be filled with fingerprints.
There are pros and there are cons.
Good job Google have included a trackpad. That's what'll get used most of the time, once past the novelty period.
I've wanted a touch interface to a laptop for years. Why? Why not.
Because any amount of use will be very tiring. With a mouse, trackbad or trackball, your arm is rested on a surface most of the time. Raising it up to point to the screen every time you need to select something will prove painful in time.
Also because your screen will be constantly covered in finger prints.
And because desktop/web operations often require more accuracy than is easily managed with a finger. Those as design for tablets and phones crosses over, that requirement is lessening.
Note the Chromebook Pixel includes a trackpad. Google know you're not going to be using that touch screen most of the time.
Actually when Android first came out phone makers didn't want to make a high-end "candybar" phone because it would be ridiculously expensive, so Google paid to have one made and the demand proved itself enough that phone makers came onboard and Google could retire their own-brand phone.
Yeah right. It's not as if the iPhone hadn't already demonstrated demand for that form factor.
God knows OEMs have made enough failed Wintel and Windows Phone products to hit their career fail quota
They rode that pony for 25 years. What have you done that's so great?
Google is an advertising company. I've never head anyone quite so hungry for products that are specifically designed to spy on them and advertise to them.
Dyson is a British brand. Americans would probably know it. I'd imagine there are quite a few countries where they are familiar.
But the general point is that captchas would have to be targeted per country. And that part at least is not an issue with this scheme, because the advertisers would want the ads to be targeted per country anyway.
Cheaper vacuums that don't work nearly as well are available. Typical vacuum, it's hard to tell if the suction is working at all, without putting your hand over the aperture. A Dyson tends to pull the carpet up from the floor.
(That may have changed since Dyson's patent on cyclonic vacuums ran out. I haven't tried any of the Dyson copies.)
I have been paid to do CAPTCHA - solving apps myself.
So you rent yourself out to spammers? Or something less objectionable? I'm trying to think of a legitimate reason for mass cracking of captchas but I can't think of one. Have I missed something?
Lowest common denominator. The way so many things in the world turn to shit.
In Sao Paolo they banned billboard advertising. Business wasn't damaged at all.
In many cities and towns in Europe, advertising only allowed to be very low key, so that it doesn't spoil the look of the place. Especially so in historical locations. They still flourish.
The only reason there's so much advertising on the internet is there's nothing to stop it. Bad practices induce worse practices.
What does the purpose of the internet's creation have anything to do with the day someone asked 'who the hell is going to pay for all this'?
Government pays for some of the internet. Consumers pay for some of the internet to their ISPs. Lots of content providers do it for fun. Lots of content providers do it because they want to spread their message, and that doesn't have to be third party advertising. If the internet wasn't an advertisers whorehouse, micropayments might take off for things that are worth paying for.
And yet, people get upset about targeting ads, as if that was a bad thing rather than a blessing.
I'm not at all upset about targeted ads themselves. If I'm going to see an ad I'd prefer it to be relevant. What I object to is being spied upon by companies that want to target ads at me.
As it happens I use Ad-block, so it makes no difference whether they try to target ads at me. I'm having my privacy compromised for something that's not benefiting anyone.
The strange part would be that if you go back in history before the gun ban, the US murder rate was even higher and the UK's lower. After you banned guns your murder rate rose/remained stable(mostly), while after a time the US murder rate underwent a huge drop.
It's not so strange. The UK gun ban came in because gun crime was rising. Not everyone gives up their gun just because there's a ban. It takes a while for the police to reduce those numbers. Few law changes and law enforcement initiatives affect the statistics instantly.
In general, if you're not in those areas, as a white person you're safer in the USA than you are in Europe.
Than where in Europe? Unsurprisingly Europe also has high crime areas and low crime areas. You're saying it you exclude the high crime areas of America, but include the high crime areas of Europe, you're safer in the USA! It means nothing. If you're going to stick to low crime areas in America, you're probably going to stick to low crime areas in Europe too.
Homicide rates in UK were lower than in US long before the handgun bans, or, indeed, any other kind of gun regulations that they've instituted.
That's because gun ownership was low even before the ban.
On the other hand, we have an example of Australia, which instituted a thorough gun ban in 1996 with a mandatory buy-back program... and it did exactly nothing for their murder rates, and all other violent crime as well (the only notable change since then is a 40% increase in rapes, though it's unlikely to be connected to the ban).
I've debunked that several times before. And I think at least one of those times was with you. You might not be capable of learning, but I'm not wasting more time on you.
Slashdot Mirror
There's always a fascist/statist ready to "balance" my freedom, of this I have no doubt. Everything you will ever do will have some negative impact on someone somewhere, so, hey, lets have the government resolve every one of those instances with a law - what could go wrong?
Then you're not even a libertarian. You're an anarchist.
Life isn't safe, nor should it be.
So if your neighbours choose to have lions freely roaming their grounds, without proper fences, you're OK with that. Well it doesn't matter if you're not OK with it. That's his right. But of course you have your guns. And no one with a gun was ever successful stalked by a lion!
Terrorism has a wide and subjective definition whether you are in NK or the USA.
Did you know that North Korea has a number of pilotless aircraft constantly circling various foreign countries. And from time to time these aircrafts assassinate both NK nationals and foreigners who are deemed to be against North Korea. No trial. No worries about who else might be in the building they destroy. Women and children as well as men.
Oh no, sorry - thats the USA.
Come now, a handful of examples, some dating back to 1978. The US has kidnapped hundreds of people from other countries in the last 12 years and are keeping them hostages without trial, and at some points in time used torture on them.
And several of the examples you state are of individuals that have illegally crossed the border into N Korea. The US also arrests people that illegally cross their borders. And whilst many are sent straight back, thousands are in long term detention.
So if you can say that the US is welcoming of foreigners, and treat them well, you can say that of N Korea too. Because in both cases the majority are. And the minority are persecuted.
That article was written by and about Michael Arrington. The biggest drama queen in tech reporting. And not known for honesty. It's not even sure there was a boat, let alone a second officer.
No story here until someone corroborates it.
Too right they do! Search YouTube for North Korea Traffic Girls.
Amen. There's also been lots of talk recently about China hacking into American sites. It's a terrible thing. However America doing cyber intelligence is obviously a good thing. Hypocrites they are.
I would. When was the last time N Korea arrested visitors saying they were CIA spies? On the contrary, N Korea is very welcoming to foreigners, including Americans. It seems they want to impress them, not arrest them. This 3G internet for visitors seems another step in the same direction.
It's their own people they persecute. And the South Koreans, who they consider to be traitors to a unified Korea.
I know several people like you ready to throw away any amount of freedom, no matter how large, for any amount of safety
Freedom has to be balanced. The balance between your freedom to play with guns, against other people's freedom from being shot.
I know entire nations full of rational people that think guns should be very strictly controlled or banned. The US is unusual in it's belief that guns are a right. A brainwashed nation.
I don't know who Sam Harris is, nor the source of his rather odd stat. I could search for it but if you ca't be bothered.... Bit more assaults for less homicides? Of course it's a good trade off.
Trouble with pro-gun types is that they always imagine they'll be the one's shooting, rather than the ones dying. And screw everyone that does die.
No, you didn't
Yes I did. Properly. Taking time to find the figures and the quotes from the prime minister of the day. And you don't even remember. Like I said, waste of time.
"you're an idiot, go away, la-la-la I can't hear you."
I would never say that.
Now fuck off, you tedious moron, la-la-la I can't hear you.
... and nothing of value was lost. If every advertising company worker in the world had to go and do something else, or even be unemployed, it would make the world a significantly better place.
"It must be a few people with large collections. I'd be very surprised to find that there aren't more people that own guns in Egypt."
The statistics show that in fact, the UK has more guns per 100 people than Egypt does.
Different things. Not contradictory.
And neither is the same thing as "civilians with handguns" which is the point I made.
If you manually back up regularly. Something I hardly ever do for external drives...
Manually? OSX backs up automatically, every hour. And will include external drives when they're plugged in. Has that functionality not been included in Windows and Linux yet?
Of course you need more total space on your backup drives than the drives you're backing up.
For that, I get to selectively restore any version of any file or set of files from my backups. Does your cloud solution offer that? Or is it just a disaster recovery system?
Carring your external hard drive across a continent and an ocean in your bag and having it be subjected to searches for illegal content when entering certain countries is more convenient than just accessing your files over the web when you get there?
If you have dodgy files, you probably don't want them up on the cloud either.
Personally I'm not always connected to the web, so cloud solutions are worthless to me.
A touchscreen is quicker (if you discount the distance moved from the keyboard) and direct manipulation is more instinctive. Which is why tablets and touchscreen phones have become popular.
However, it's also a lot less accurate. Which is why tablets and phones have big targets for touches.
If the ChromeOS, it's apps and the web pages you use are all designed for touch, then touch will be OK.
Except for the fact that reaching up to touch a laptop screen will be tiring. The screen will tip backwards every time you touch it. And the screen will always be filled with fingerprints.
There are pros and there are cons.
Good job Google have included a trackpad. That's what'll get used most of the time, once past the novelty period.
I've wanted a touch interface to a laptop for years. Why? Why not.
Because any amount of use will be very tiring. With a mouse, trackbad or trackball, your arm is rested on a surface most of the time. Raising it up to point to the screen every time you need to select something will prove painful in time.
Also because your screen will be constantly covered in finger prints.
And because desktop/web operations often require more accuracy than is easily managed with a finger. Those as design for tablets and phones crosses over, that requirement is lessening.
Note the Chromebook Pixel includes a trackpad. Google know you're not going to be using that touch screen most of the time.
Actually when Android first came out phone makers didn't want to make a high-end "candybar" phone because it would be ridiculously expensive, so Google paid to have one made and the demand proved itself enough that phone makers came onboard and Google could retire their own-brand phone.
Yeah right. It's not as if the iPhone hadn't already demonstrated demand for that form factor.
God knows OEMs have made enough failed Wintel and Windows Phone products to hit their career fail quota
They rode that pony for 25 years. What have you done that's so great?
Google is an advertising company. I've never head anyone quite so hungry for products that are specifically designed to spy on them and advertise to them.
Dyson is a British brand. Americans would probably know it. I'd imagine there are quite a few countries where they are familiar.
But the general point is that captchas would have to be targeted per country. And that part at least is not an issue with this scheme, because the advertisers would want the ads to be targeted per country anyway.
Cheaper vacuums that don't work nearly as well are available. Typical vacuum, it's hard to tell if the suction is working at all, without putting your hand over the aperture. A Dyson tends to pull the carpet up from the floor.
(That may have changed since Dyson's patent on cyclonic vacuums ran out. I haven't tried any of the Dyson copies.)
I have been paid to do CAPTCHA - solving apps myself.
So you rent yourself out to spammers? Or something less objectionable? I'm trying to think of a legitimate reason for mass cracking of captchas but I can't think of one. Have I missed something?
The sites you use decide what they put up.
Lowest common denominator. The way so many things in the world turn to shit.
In Sao Paolo they banned billboard advertising. Business wasn't damaged at all.
In many cities and towns in Europe, advertising only allowed to be very low key, so that it doesn't spoil the look of the place. Especially so in historical locations. They still flourish.
The only reason there's so much advertising on the internet is there's nothing to stop it. Bad practices induce worse practices.
What does the purpose of the internet's creation have anything to do with the day someone asked 'who the hell is going to pay for all this'?
Government pays for some of the internet. Consumers pay for some of the internet to their ISPs. Lots of content providers do it for fun. Lots of content providers do it because they want to spread their message, and that doesn't have to be third party advertising. If the internet wasn't an advertisers whorehouse, micropayments might take off for things that are worth paying for.
Advertising doesn't have to ruin everything.
And yet, people get upset about targeting ads, as if that was a bad thing rather than a blessing.
I'm not at all upset about targeted ads themselves. If I'm going to see an ad I'd prefer it to be relevant. What I object to is being spied upon by companies that want to target ads at me.
As it happens I use Ad-block, so it makes no difference whether they try to target ads at me. I'm having my privacy compromised for something that's not benefiting anyone.
The strange part would be that if you go back in history before the gun ban, the US murder rate was even higher and the UK's lower. After you banned guns your murder rate rose/remained stable(mostly), while after a time the US murder rate underwent a huge drop.
It's not so strange. The UK gun ban came in because gun crime was rising. Not everyone gives up their gun just because there's a ban. It takes a while for the police to reduce those numbers. Few law changes and law enforcement initiatives affect the statistics instantly.
In general, if you're not in those areas, as a white person you're safer in the USA than you are in Europe.
Than where in Europe? Unsurprisingly Europe also has high crime areas and low crime areas. You're saying it you exclude the high crime areas of America, but include the high crime areas of Europe, you're safer in the USA! It means nothing. If you're going to stick to low crime areas in America, you're probably going to stick to low crime areas in Europe too.
Homicide rates in UK were lower than in US long before the handgun bans, or, indeed, any other kind of gun regulations that they've instituted.
That's because gun ownership was low even before the ban.
On the other hand, we have an example of Australia, which instituted a thorough gun ban in 1996 with a mandatory buy-back program... and it did exactly nothing for their murder rates, and all other violent crime as well (the only notable change since then is a 40% increase in rapes, though it's unlikely to be connected to the ban).
I've debunked that several times before. And I think at least one of those times was with you. You might not be capable of learning, but I'm not wasting more time on you.
Yeah right, He accidently shot his wife four times.
Notice the capitalised "MAY". I tend to wait for a court judgement. I mentioned it purely because it's currently in the news.
Most handgun accidents are caused by the owners stupidity.
So stop stupid people owning guns. And anyone who has a stupid person in the house. Including children.
According to those figures.
Twice as likely to be assaulted.
A quarter of the chance of being murdered.
Yes, Britain's better in this regard.