That was exactly what I was thinking- I wouldn't be surprised if much of the legislative effort to contain and control internet activity ("For the Children...") is predicated upon the desire to stop the scenarios presented in TFA.
Microsoft is generally pay-for, even in College. Reduced functionality at a reduce cost, but still a cost. Also have to worry about the costs just to run Windows that the Shills never mention. Unless of course you are never going to connect to anything, use external media, pay for the license to use Windows, etc..
Whether or not I get tagged as a shill... When I was doing my graduate work, I downloaded Visual Studio and other stuff for free from Dreamspark. Probably need to check the licensing stuff once again, but I'm still using it. Never cost me a dime.
Shiftless was replying more to sosume's implication that McAfee somehow extracted tax money from society that he should repay.
My understanding as to the main reason John moved to Belize was that he was being sued over a fatal ultralight accident, quite a while after he cashed out his interest in his company in 1994.
While I think McAfee is a douchebag, I'm afraid that I agree very much with shiftless's statement, flamebait or not.
Interesting anecdote: I remember a book laying around our shop that John published in 1988 or so, when his product was shareware you could download from CompuServe. The subject of this book was how to write viruses, particularly DOS Terminate & Stay Resident type. Actually, it was a decent manual. I know that information wants to be free and all, but I always wondered about the timing. Had a chance to ask him about it about 3 years ago, and he basically said it was to help programmers identify and defeat viruses.
...but skipping surgery based on what some random dude on a blog says? C'mon, you're flirting with argumentum ad absurdum there.
I would tend to agree with you, but on the other hand I've heard of people doing just that kind of thing. For instance, a neurologist friend of mine had recently been seeing an unusual number (5, over 3 weeks) of people being admitted for symptoms and signs resembling Myasthenia Gravis and MS in his rural hospital.
After spending a fair amount of time investigating, turns out that these people sought out a "practitioner" in the community that injected them with fluid pulled from some ungodly mixture of ground up pig brains... never heard what it was they were trying to treat. The patients ended up with neurological autoimmune disorders and are not in very good shape. I'm not making this up, either- It took forever for doctors and authorities to figure out what happened, as the patients were concerned that the practitioner would be prosecuted, so were reluctant to talk.
Then there's the recent case of an individual in Houston jailed for injecting some mixture (including caulk) into her customers' butt cheeks to plump up their rear ends.
Take Steve Jobs- from what I read, had he undergone a pancreatic Whipple procedure immediately after his cancer diagnosis instead of waiting 10 months while first trying "naturopathic" remedies, he likely would have had more time in a better state of health before succumbing to his disease- not a sure thing, but it was the opinion of several doctors that worked on him that he would have been much better off avoiding the naturopathic approach as a first option. I can't fault someone trying -anything- as a last resort, after other, more proven options have failed, but to seek out naturopathy or homeopothy as a primary treatment?
Subtle racism and then someone complaining if you object to it. Often they complain without anyone objecting (here two people complained). It's the new political correctness.
I'm honestly curious what criteria you are using to categorize this as "subtle racism".
On American soil there are about as many (if not more) terrorist attacks from Christians as there are from Muslims. Yet you don't fear when you see a Christian board the plane, only from someone in "muslim garb?" That isn't natural, it is an irrational fear. Partially propagated by the stupid media. But also perpetuated by bigoted statements.
While I'm not using the figures below to support bigotry, I think I understand why some people fear attacks from Islamic Extremists more than from other groups.
Referring to a compilation that uses data gathered by the FBI regarding terrorist attacks on US soil 1980-2005 (scroll to the bottom of the FBI page for the data):
Percentage of terrorist attacks by ideology / culture:
42% - Latino
24% - Extreme Left-Wing Groups
16% - Other
7% - Jewish Extremists
6% - Islamic Extremists
5% - Communists
When comparing this data to the casualties caused by those terrorist acts committed by the groups listed above, it's easier to understand why some people might focus on Islamic Extremists. Compiled from the FBI data:
94% - Deaths from terrorist acts committed by Islamic Extremists: 2,981 of 3,178 (2972 on 9/11)
6% - Deaths from terrorist acts committed by all other groups: 197 of 3,178
-
93% - Injuries from terrorist acts committed by Islamic Extremists: 13,051 of 14,038 (Est. 12,000 on 9/11)
7% - Injuries from terrorist acts committed by all other groups: 987 of 14,038
If you think that sounds ridiculous, maybe you should reexamine your own stereotypes.
It does sound ridiculous, because you're standing up a straw man- Why not take a minute and respond directly to his argument instead:
Me? Sure, if I'm walking a street alone (especially in New Orleans) and I see some black teen males walking behind me or coming near me...I keep a very wary eye out on them, and often will cross to the other side of the road and keep an eye out for my options to get to safety in case of a mugging.
Why?
Well,young black teens commit an overwhelming amount of muggings down here. They are often caught on the cameras wearing gang-banger clothes. If I see that, I naturally am apprehensive. If said young black men were wearing suits, or dressed in a more normal, non-threatening middle class manner, no...I'd not likely be worried for my safety.
While stereotyping is more often misused than not, it is not ridiculous to be apprehensive if approached while walking alone down Rampart in New Orleans by a group of black teenage teen males dressed in clothing typically worn by gang members.
It is also not ridiculous to be apprehensive if approached by a group of rough-looking rednecks while walking alone in a small East Texas town.
I've been in both situations, and would have been foolish had I not been apprehensive in each. By the same token, had the teenagers been dressed in clothing not similar to that worn by violent gangs, and if the rednecks had been dressed differently and had hidden a couple of (big) tattoos I usually associate with prison life (and had later not idled slowly past me in a pickup truck, sporting a confederate flag decal and plastered with bumper stickers that advocated some pretty rotten stuff for "liberals" and "yankees"), I would have been less concerned about my well-being.
Granted, not all black teenagers on Rampart that walk in groups and wear gang-affiliated clothing are a threat to lone individuals walking nearby, and the same may be said for groups of scruffy-looking rednecks in east Texas that drive beat-up pickup trucks with offensive bumper stickers, but based upon the crime rates in specific areas and in specific situations, there is an elevated risk. In some situations, it is not unreasonable or bigoted to be apprehensive based upon a stereotype.
Really, because I've personally witnessed a rather angry full-grown mute swan take off from dry land from a standing start. An an impressive sight and it took a long time to build up height afterwards
Curious- after getting off the ground, did it use ground effect to build up speed before climbing out?
What I left out was that before accepting their order, the Saudis, adhering to Wahhabi doctrine, demand assurances that none of the PRC weapon system pigeons are female, even demanding the program be renamed before they make the purchase.
Boeing doubles the price and hopes to sell at least 1000 units of the Pigeon Reconnaissance Intelligence and Communication System each year to the Kingdom.
...then the people that awarded the bid to the cheaper contractor are left wondering why the cheaper pigeons are falling from the skies and killing innocent citizens.
Maybe quietly to themselves, while DoD media relations at Fox informs their viewers: "...if they were innocent, they wouldn't be dead now, would they."
What the DoD will do is hire a contractor to armor the pigeons, who will then design armor that puts the pigeons over max gross weight, so they'll add wing extensions, but since pigeon wing muscles can't flap the modified wings as fast, they'll replace their little pigeon wings with fixed composite wings and pigeon-scale turbine engines.
Unfortunately the turbine engine exhaust burns pigeon tail feathers, so they'll replace these with composites also. The Air Force will see an opportunity at this point to add hard-points to the composite wings, so the wing area and turbines will be made larger, increasing cruising speed and altitude, requiring life-support for the pigeons.
Cost: about $500,000 / pigeon for the Block 20 model, assuming the contractor will be allowed to sell Block 10 Pigeon Communication and Reconnaissance (PCR) units to our allies in Saudi Arabia. Test flights slated for 2020.
Yes, the cardholders will suffer collateral emotional damage and some will spend time or money trying to protect themselves in case I'm also motivated by greed, but the intended victim is the company I stole the data from.
You mention "collateral damage" so casually.
Collateral damage to innocents is usually vilified by the/. crowd when it comes about by the actions of corporations and governments/military/police, yet when a "distinction" is made for "activists" of some sort, suddenly it's not as bad, because "the intended victim is the company I stole the data from".
Bullshit. If someone is hell-bent on tilting at some windmill... sure, a villain to them, but maybe not so much to an otherwise innocent bystander... and they hurt innocent bystanders- and they do not take the responsibility to try to make that bystander whole again, they are no different than any other entity that hurts innocents while pursuing its own agenda.
If I'm hurt or If my property is stolen by a corrupt government or an activist, each pursuing their own agenda (that I'm not a part of) under whatever rationalization to which they subscribe, it's all the same to me if I'm still in the hole at the end of the day, figuratively or literally.
Too many people believe that if they agree with some agenda, it's suddenly okay to hurt someone else (that's not involved) while pursuing it- without taking responsibility for their actions. If I'm not involved, and you hurt me in the pursuit of your goal without trying to make it right, I do not give a shit what your cause is- You are my Enemy.
There are only two potential problems with nicotine use that I can cite: 1) There is some evidence that over-expression of the FOXM1 gene is linked to a higher risk of mouth cancer when owners of the over-expressed gene chew nicotine gum. 2) Nicotine is a powerful vasoconstrictor, which can lead to various problems, especially as one ages. I've never smoked, but chew nicotine gum- Now that I'm getting older, there have been a couple times that I've noticed minor problems with #2.
... assuming programmers are grouped in with IT, it could be a bad thing. You'd want them to know what they're competing with, and to understand why a rival's product is so popular.
Good point; I wouldn't be surprised if individual exceptions were made by management on an "as needed" basis.
...from using company funds to purchase any products produced by Apple.
While it makes me want to ask "why?" when I first read this, I would say that it's entirely reasonable for Microsoft to decide what equipment Microsoft funds are used to purchase.
There's absolutely no sound reason to not have federal laws against marijuana. It's a drug, plain and simple.
If you don't like it, try and figure out a reason why it's not a drug.
Marijuana is absolutely a drug. So?
I don't smoke marijuana, so I don't have much skin in the game, but tell me: Why does the fact that marijuana is a drug make it bad?
I work in biomedical informatics, building physician order entry systems. One of the reasons (other than government-mandated "meaningful use") that these systems are being put into place is that prescription drug-related serious injuries and deaths, in US hospitals alone, run about 70,000+ / year. There's no telling what that number is outside the clinical environment, for prescription drugs used properly under doctors' control, but it's probably similar.
Take a moment and tell me what is so bad about marijuana use. Tell me why it's worse than using alcohol or nicotine. I have no citations, but I believe that injuries and deaths just from the use of these two drugs is far greater that those occurring from marijuana use- Wouldn't it make as much sense then to arrest and imprison people for possession of these drugs? There's a very good argument, based on your statement above, that "there's absolutely no sound reason to not have federal laws against alcohol and nicotine" as well. Other than the brutality associated with some of the production and delivery of the drug, (which is largely driven by its prohibition), compare the morbidity / mortality associated with marijuana use and alcohol, nicotine, or even doing something as mind-blowingly stupid as texting while operating a vehicle on the freeway.
"It's a drug, plain and simple." is the dumbest, most poorly thought out argument against using marijuana that I've ever heard. You might as well say "Just Because".
Slashdot Mirror
Or some FUDdy way to push oppressive legislation?
That was exactly what I was thinking- I wouldn't be surprised if much of the legislative effort to contain and control internet activity ("For the Children...") is predicated upon the desire to stop the scenarios presented in TFA.
Damn. I was just pulling my pitchfork and torch out of the shed. Thought it was interesting; should have done more research.
The end result is that the innovators move elsewhere.
Where?
Microsoft is generally pay-for, even in College. Reduced functionality at a reduce cost, but still a cost. Also have to worry about the costs just to run Windows that the Shills never mention. Unless of course you are never going to connect to anything, use external media, pay for the license to use Windows, etc..
Whether or not I get tagged as a shill... When I was doing my graduate work, I downloaded Visual Studio and other stuff for free from Dreamspark. Probably need to check the licensing stuff once again, but I'm still using it. Never cost me a dime.
A horizontal version of Project Orion ?
Shiftless was replying more to sosume's implication that McAfee somehow extracted tax money from society that he should repay.
My understanding as to the main reason John moved to Belize was that he was being sued over a fatal ultralight accident, quite a while after he cashed out his interest in his company in 1994.
While I think McAfee is a douchebag, I'm afraid that I agree very much with shiftless's statement, flamebait or not.
Interesting anecdote: I remember a book laying around our shop that John published in 1988 or so, when his product was shareware you could download from CompuServe. The subject of this book was how to write viruses, particularly DOS Terminate & Stay Resident type. Actually, it was a decent manual. I know that information wants to be free and all, but I always wondered about the timing. Had a chance to ask him about it about 3 years ago, and he basically said it was to help programmers identify and defeat viruses.
Mergers like Comcast/NBC should be illegal.
When you start paying Congress as much cash as Comcast, NBC and General Electric pay, then you can make the rules.
...but skipping surgery based on what some random dude on a blog says? C'mon, you're flirting with argumentum ad absurdum there.
I would tend to agree with you, but on the other hand I've heard of people doing just that kind of thing. For instance, a neurologist friend of mine had recently been seeing an unusual number (5, over 3 weeks) of people being admitted for symptoms and signs resembling Myasthenia Gravis and MS in his rural hospital.
After spending a fair amount of time investigating, turns out that these people sought out a "practitioner" in the community that injected them with fluid pulled from some ungodly mixture of ground up pig brains... never heard what it was they were trying to treat. The patients ended up with neurological autoimmune disorders and are not in very good shape. I'm not making this up, either- It took forever for doctors and authorities to figure out what happened, as the patients were concerned that the practitioner would be prosecuted, so were reluctant to talk.
Then there's the recent case of an individual in Houston jailed for injecting some mixture (including caulk) into her customers' butt cheeks to plump up their rear ends.
Take Steve Jobs- from what I read, had he undergone a pancreatic Whipple procedure immediately after his cancer diagnosis instead of waiting 10 months while first trying "naturopathic" remedies, he likely would have had more time in a better state of health before succumbing to his disease- not a sure thing, but it was the opinion of several doctors that worked on him that he would have been much better off avoiding the naturopathic approach as a first option. I can't fault someone trying -anything- as a last resort, after other, more proven options have failed, but to seek out naturopathy or homeopothy as a primary treatment?
Never underestimate human stupidity.
Subtle racism and then someone complaining if you object to it. Often they complain without anyone objecting (here two people complained). It's the new political correctness.
I'm honestly curious what criteria you are using to categorize this as "subtle racism".
On American soil there are about as many (if not more) terrorist attacks from Christians as there are from Muslims. Yet you don't fear when you see a Christian board the plane, only from someone in "muslim garb?" That isn't natural, it is an irrational fear. Partially propagated by the stupid media. But also perpetuated by bigoted statements.
While I'm not using the figures below to support bigotry, I think I understand why some people fear attacks from Islamic Extremists more than from other groups.
Referring to a compilation that uses data gathered by the FBI regarding terrorist attacks on US soil 1980-2005 (scroll to the bottom of the FBI page for the data):
Percentage of terrorist attacks by ideology / culture:
When comparing this data to the casualties caused by those terrorist acts committed by the groups listed above, it's easier to understand why some people might focus on Islamic Extremists. Compiled from the FBI data:
If you think that sounds ridiculous, maybe you should reexamine your own stereotypes.
It does sound ridiculous, because you're standing up a straw man- Why not take a minute and respond directly to his argument instead:
Me? Sure, if I'm walking a street alone (especially in New Orleans) and I see some black teen males walking behind me or coming near me...I keep a very wary eye out on them, and often will cross to the other side of the road and keep an eye out for my options to get to safety in case of a mugging. Why? Well,young black teens commit an overwhelming amount of muggings down here. They are often caught on the cameras wearing gang-banger clothes. If I see that, I naturally am apprehensive. If said young black men were wearing suits, or dressed in a more normal, non-threatening middle class manner, no...I'd not likely be worried for my safety.
While stereotyping is more often misused than not, it is not ridiculous to be apprehensive if approached while walking alone down Rampart in New Orleans by a group of black teenage teen males dressed in clothing typically worn by gang members.
It is also not ridiculous to be apprehensive if approached by a group of rough-looking rednecks while walking alone in a small East Texas town.
I've been in both situations, and would have been foolish had I not been apprehensive in each. By the same token, had the teenagers been dressed in clothing not similar to that worn by violent gangs, and if the rednecks had been dressed differently and had hidden a couple of (big) tattoos I usually associate with prison life (and had later not idled slowly past me in a pickup truck, sporting a confederate flag decal and plastered with bumper stickers that advocated some pretty rotten stuff for "liberals" and "yankees"), I would have been less concerned about my well-being.
Granted, not all black teenagers on Rampart that walk in groups and wear gang-affiliated clothing are a threat to lone individuals walking nearby, and the same may be said for groups of scruffy-looking rednecks in east Texas that drive beat-up pickup trucks with offensive bumper stickers, but based upon the crime rates in specific areas and in specific situations, there is an elevated risk. In some situations, it is not unreasonable or bigoted to be apprehensive based upon a stereotype.
Really, because I've personally witnessed a rather angry full-grown mute swan take off from dry land from a standing start. An an impressive sight and it took a long time to build up height afterwards
Curious- after getting off the ground, did it use ground effect to build up speed before climbing out?
Bullshit. ALL helicopters can autorotate.
Unfortunately, not all helicopter pilots can.
Comodo Dragon supposedly takes Chromium a bit further with security enhancements.
... others will tell you NEVER use a goto
NOooo! That is the word the knights who say "Knuth" must never hear!
You left out the part where...
What I left out was that before accepting their order, the Saudis, adhering to Wahhabi doctrine, demand assurances that none of the PRC weapon system pigeons are female, even demanding the program be renamed before they make the purchase.
Boeing doubles the price and hopes to sell at least 1000 units of the Pigeon Reconnaissance Intelligence and Communication System each year to the Kingdom.
...then the people that awarded the bid to the cheaper contractor are left wondering why the cheaper pigeons are falling from the skies and killing innocent citizens.
Maybe quietly to themselves, while DoD media relations at Fox informs their viewers: "...if they were innocent, they wouldn't be dead now, would they."
What the DoD will do is hire a contractor to armor the pigeons, who will then design armor that puts the pigeons over max gross weight, so they'll add wing extensions, but since pigeon wing muscles can't flap the modified wings as fast, they'll replace their little pigeon wings with fixed composite wings and pigeon-scale turbine engines.
Unfortunately the turbine engine exhaust burns pigeon tail feathers, so they'll replace these with composites also. The Air Force will see an opportunity at this point to add hard-points to the composite wings, so the wing area and turbines will be made larger, increasing cruising speed and altitude, requiring life-support for the pigeons.
Cost: about $500,000 / pigeon for the Block 20 model, assuming the contractor will be allowed to sell Block 10 Pigeon Communication and Reconnaissance (PCR) units to our allies in Saudi Arabia. Test flights slated for 2020.
Yes, the cardholders will suffer collateral emotional damage and some will spend time or money trying to protect themselves in case I'm also motivated by greed, but the intended victim is the company I stole the data from.
You mention "collateral damage" so casually.
Collateral damage to innocents is usually vilified by the /. crowd when it comes about by the actions of corporations and governments/military/police, yet when a "distinction" is made for "activists" of some sort, suddenly it's not as bad, because "the intended victim is the company I stole the data from".
Bullshit. If someone is hell-bent on tilting at some windmill... sure, a villain to them, but maybe not so much to an otherwise innocent bystander... and they hurt innocent bystanders- and they do not take the responsibility to try to make that bystander whole again, they are no different than any other entity that hurts innocents while pursuing its own agenda.
If I'm hurt or If my property is stolen by a corrupt government or an activist, each pursuing their own agenda (that I'm not a part of) under whatever rationalization to which they subscribe, it's all the same to me if I'm still in the hole at the end of the day, figuratively or literally.
Too many people believe that if they agree with some agenda, it's suddenly okay to hurt someone else (that's not involved) while pursuing it- without taking responsibility for their actions. If I'm not involved, and you hurt me in the pursuit of your goal without trying to make it right, I do not give a shit what your cause is- You are my Enemy.
There are only two potential problems with nicotine use that I can cite: 1) There is some evidence that over-expression of the FOXM1 gene is linked to a higher risk of mouth cancer when owners of the over-expressed gene chew nicotine gum. 2) Nicotine is a powerful vasoconstrictor, which can lead to various problems, especially as one ages. I've never smoked, but chew nicotine gum- Now that I'm getting older, there have been a couple times that I've noticed minor problems with #2.
I'm sure that's foremost in their decision-making process. Someone please mod this "Funny".
... assuming programmers are grouped in with IT, it could be a bad thing. You'd want them to know what they're competing with, and to understand why a rival's product is so popular.
Good point; I wouldn't be surprised if individual exceptions were made by management on an "as needed" basis.
...from using company funds to purchase any products produced by Apple.
While it makes me want to ask "why?" when I first read this, I would say that it's entirely reasonable for Microsoft to decide what equipment Microsoft funds are used to purchase.
There's absolutely no sound reason to not have federal laws against marijuana. It's a drug, plain and simple. If you don't like it, try and figure out a reason why it's not a drug.
Marijuana is absolutely a drug. So?
I don't smoke marijuana, so I don't have much skin in the game, but tell me: Why does the fact that marijuana is a drug make it bad?
I work in biomedical informatics, building physician order entry systems. One of the reasons (other than government-mandated "meaningful use") that these systems are being put into place is that prescription drug-related serious injuries and deaths, in US hospitals alone, run about 70,000+ / year. There's no telling what that number is outside the clinical environment, for prescription drugs used properly under doctors' control, but it's probably similar.
Take a moment and tell me what is so bad about marijuana use. Tell me why it's worse than using alcohol or nicotine. I have no citations, but I believe that injuries and deaths just from the use of these two drugs is far greater that those occurring from marijuana use- Wouldn't it make as much sense then to arrest and imprison people for possession of these drugs? There's a very good argument, based on your statement above, that "there's absolutely no sound reason to not have federal laws against alcohol and nicotine" as well. Other than the brutality associated with some of the production and delivery of the drug, (which is largely driven by its prohibition), compare the morbidity / mortality associated with marijuana use and alcohol, nicotine, or even doing something as mind-blowingly stupid as texting while operating a vehicle on the freeway.
"It's a drug, plain and simple." is the dumbest, most poorly thought out argument against using marijuana that I've ever heard. You might as well say "Just Because".