Any closed fist blow to the head, whether intended to be harassing or "joking around" is automatically an attempt at lethal damage. In my example, the boy who attacked was lucky that he escaped with no permanent damage.
All lethal violence, whether intended or not, is equivalent.
I'll be happy to take Gandhi. He succeeded only because the British were willing to let him. Do you think that non-violence works in China? North Korea? Russia? Any Islamic country (with the exception of Turkey)? Lying in front of trains to stop them doesn't work if the engineer just keeps driving.
Non-violence only works when used against the non-violent. Maturity has nothing to do with it, unless you are referring to cultural maturity. And then we get hopeless Social Darwinistic (or worse - Marxist.)
I had this problem. I was on the wrestling team at a heavier but very fit weight, being a state wrestler. I was also a nerd who greatly enjoyed his computers and D&D. Being a nerd, it was of course appropriate to gleek (spit) me, push, tease mercilessly, and otherwise inflict cruelty.
One day in the 8th grade, a thug hit me on the back of the head. I turned around, headlocked him to the ground, and punched him until he was unconscious. He was an untrained baboon who didn't stand a chance. A teacher came over and broke up the fight.
Like something out of a lame Hughes movie, I was applauded when I entered the cafeteria that day. I was exceedingly popular for the next two weeks - everyone likes seeing a thug get what they deserve. I never had to fight again either, as everyone who laid a finger on me knew what would happen.
Unfortunately, I received the same punishment as the thug who hit me. This is not right. There is distinct disconnect in administration perception and the reality of the situation of what happens to the various social pariahs. The social pariahs are punished for fighting back and therefore the bullies are encouraged. Let me say this more clearly. Zero tolerance policies lead to bullying.
It is my belief that the support of bullying leads directly to situations such as those boys in Columbine. If you cannot fight back, then you must either totally submit to all indignities or rebel against hopeless odds.
There should be a physical violence outlet for the social pariahs against bullies. Bullies need to be confronted, physically, by the social pariahs. It is in the natural order of things that a whipped dog bites back eventually. It is natural and beneficial for the social pariah (and probably for the bully as well) that bullies be beaten in fights.
I don't know that this could get f*cked up. It's operating out of Fort Meade, so it's basically operating in NSA territory. It's mandate is already being filled by the NSA, assuming that the CyberCommand cannot operate on US territory. (That should be assured, as the fellow is a general. But it no longer is; probably never was.)
I have heard of the melamine milk scandal. The CCP killed a farmer who may or may not have heard that his milk was being altered and a guy who may or may not have known the stuff he was mixing together could hurt anyone. The owners and operators of the company more or less got off. The local communists, who covered the problem up, were fired by the government and then quietly rehired elsewhere some months later.
And the only reason anyone knew about any of this is New Zealanders discovered the problem and reported it.
That 8 hour stuff isn't possible. How many 17:30 meetings have you been in, or 08:00 corporate town halls? If you work hard for your 40, you'll just be taken advantage of.
Don't be a moron. This is the first society in history where everyone has enough.
If a person does not have health care today, it is because they have made a choice not to. They may have made the choice in high school not to study, or they may have decided that insurance is not something they need.
You see in the United States, survival is a privilege, not a right. This is a land where a person will be left alone by the government and they can make what they will of their life. This is a land of freedom, not a land of security. If you want security, go back to Europe.
A person has no reason to expect anonymity on a computer or network that is not their own. Any key tracking software cannot differentiate between personal e-mail and work. Further, any firewall will not be able to differentiate either.
And what happens when a person uses personal e-mail addresses for work related happenings?
These sorts of nonsensical babblings are what happens when antediluvian luddites make important and lasting decisions in regards to technology they are in no way capable of comprehending - let alone understanding.
Instead, the court should have asked: if Stengart had left a written letter to her attorney in her desk when she left Loving Care, could Loving Care have used that letter in preperation for court cases?
But no. These ignorant technophobes said, "If there is a password, you should expect privacy." Moronic. Perfectly Moronic.
I have several adult users who would have loved to have Microsoft Bob. As it was, there was very cranky people well I changed to Office 2007 and they lost their Paperclips or Kitty Cat or whatever the heck they had. These cranky people are not knuckleheads, but rather accountants, loan officers, and other people who like a touchy-feely PC.
The problem is not that Microsoft Bob was marketed to adults, but rather it is IT guys who buy software for organizations. A PC is a tool and like all tools, works best with the fewest necessary peripheries. IT guys recognize this. They have no use for Bob and they feel (perhaps rightly) that their users should have no use for Bob and Bob like programs bring no real value.
I'm not sure Google is actively working to further the interests of the US. Instead, Chinese leadership is incapable of appreciating the differences between US policy, US culture, and plain ole' innate freedoms. Chinese leadership sees everything through a Han cultural perspective, with everyone not Han is either a strong barbarian intent upon conquering China or a weak barbarian who should be conquered by China.
Could a lawsuit have merit when Google's motto is do no evil? It is clear that their presence in China was creating harm.
On another note, I agree that google.cn will not be going anywhere. If nothing else, it would be a big FU to China to leave it as is but remove all censorship. Heck, pulling it might be construed as surrendering to censorship and therefore evil.
As far as I'm concerned, Adobe is a far greater security threat to my network than IE. I do not understand why people insist on using Adobe products. They are a pain to administer, and not particularly useful. Rather than concentrate on MS, why doesn't the EU take a look at a real threat, Adobe.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you?
Any closed fist blow to the head, whether intended to be harassing or "joking around" is automatically an attempt at lethal damage. In my example, the boy who attacked was lucky that he escaped with no permanent damage.
All lethal violence, whether intended or not, is equivalent.
I'll be happy to take Gandhi. He succeeded only because the British were willing to let him. Do you think that non-violence works in China? North Korea? Russia? Any Islamic country (with the exception of Turkey)? Lying in front of trains to stop them doesn't work if the engineer just keeps driving.
Non-violence only works when used against the non-violent. Maturity has nothing to do with it, unless you are referring to cultural maturity. And then we get hopeless Social Darwinistic (or worse - Marxist.)
I had this problem. I was on the wrestling team at a heavier but very fit weight, being a state wrestler. I was also a nerd who greatly enjoyed his computers and D&D. Being a nerd, it was of course appropriate to gleek (spit) me, push, tease mercilessly, and otherwise inflict cruelty.
One day in the 8th grade, a thug hit me on the back of the head. I turned around, headlocked him to the ground, and punched him until he was unconscious. He was an untrained baboon who didn't stand a chance. A teacher came over and broke up the fight.
Like something out of a lame Hughes movie, I was applauded when I entered the cafeteria that day. I was exceedingly popular for the next two weeks - everyone likes seeing a thug get what they deserve. I never had to fight again either, as everyone who laid a finger on me knew what would happen.
Unfortunately, I received the same punishment as the thug who hit me. This is not right. There is distinct disconnect in administration perception and the reality of the situation of what happens to the various social pariahs. The social pariahs are punished for fighting back and therefore the bullies are encouraged. Let me say this more clearly. Zero tolerance policies lead to bullying.
It is my belief that the support of bullying leads directly to situations such as those boys in Columbine. If you cannot fight back, then you must either totally submit to all indignities or rebel against hopeless odds.
There should be a physical violence outlet for the social pariahs against bullies. Bullies need to be confronted, physically, by the social pariahs. It is in the natural order of things that a whipped dog bites back eventually. It is natural and beneficial for the social pariah (and probably for the bully as well) that bullies be beaten in fights.
I don't know that this could get f*cked up. It's operating out of Fort Meade, so it's basically operating in NSA territory. It's mandate is already being filled by the NSA, assuming that the CyberCommand cannot operate on US territory. (That should be assured, as the fellow is a general. But it no longer is; probably never was.)
What I don't get is - how is this not the NSA?
Just so I understand. That would be like Jimbo Wales insisting to remove porn from Wikipedia?
And then update your resume.
You can tell who around here works as a technical admin and who doesn't. You can also tell who works in information security and who doesn't.
I have heard of the melamine milk scandal. The CCP killed a farmer who may or may not have heard that his milk was being altered and a guy who may or may not have known the stuff he was mixing together could hurt anyone. The owners and operators of the company more or less got off. The local communists, who covered the problem up, were fired by the government and then quietly rehired elsewhere some months later.
And the only reason anyone knew about any of this is New Zealanders discovered the problem and reported it.
That 8 hour stuff isn't possible. How many 17:30 meetings have you been in, or 08:00 corporate town halls? If you work hard for your 40, you'll just be taken advantage of.
When you rent, you have entered into a contract that you control the apartment you are in. That is to say, you have a reason to expect privacy.
But if you live in someone else's house without paying rent, and they walk on you on the crapper, then that's kinda to be expected.
Don't be a moron. This is the first society in history where everyone has enough.
If a person does not have health care today, it is because they have made a choice not to. They may have made the choice in high school not to study, or they may have decided that insurance is not something they need.
You see in the United States, survival is a privilege, not a right. This is a land where a person will be left alone by the government and they can make what they will of their life. This is a land of freedom, not a land of security. If you want security, go back to Europe.
Networks and proxies and firewalls oh my.
A person has no reason to expect anonymity on a computer or network that is not their own. Any key tracking software cannot differentiate between personal e-mail and work. Further, any firewall will not be able to differentiate either.
And what happens when a person uses personal e-mail addresses for work related happenings?
These sorts of nonsensical babblings are what happens when antediluvian luddites make important and lasting decisions in regards to technology they are in no way capable of comprehending - let alone understanding.
Instead, the court should have asked: if Stengart had left a written letter to her attorney in her desk when she left Loving Care, could Loving Care have used that letter in preperation for court cases?
But no. These ignorant technophobes said, "If there is a password, you should expect privacy." Moronic. Perfectly Moronic.
Nonsense. In the US, the poor people are fat. If they cannot afford health or otherwise, it is because they made choices in life.
These cranky people are not knuckleheads, but rather accountants
You and I have wildly diverging opinions of accountants...
If that's the case, where do you classify HR workers?
I have several adult users who would have loved to have Microsoft Bob. As it was, there was very cranky people well I changed to Office 2007 and they lost their Paperclips or Kitty Cat or whatever the heck they had. These cranky people are not knuckleheads, but rather accountants, loan officers, and other people who like a touchy-feely PC.
The problem is not that Microsoft Bob was marketed to adults, but rather it is IT guys who buy software for organizations. A PC is a tool and like all tools, works best with the fewest necessary peripheries. IT guys recognize this. They have no use for Bob and they feel (perhaps rightly) that their users should have no use for Bob and Bob like programs bring no real value.
I'm not sure Google is actively working to further the interests of the US. Instead, Chinese leadership is incapable of appreciating the differences between US policy, US culture, and plain ole' innate freedoms. Chinese leadership sees everything through a Han cultural perspective, with everyone not Han is either a strong barbarian intent upon conquering China or a weak barbarian who should be conquered by China.
Could a lawsuit have merit when Google's motto is do no evil? It is clear that their presence in China was creating harm.
On another note, I agree that google.cn will not be going anywhere. If nothing else, it would be a big FU to China to leave it as is but remove all censorship. Heck, pulling it might be construed as surrendering to censorship and therefore evil.
This makes me wish I had mod points.
Makes me want to move to a gulch somewhere.
I'm required to use adobe's horrible products.
As far as I'm concerned, Adobe is a far greater security threat to my network than IE. I do not understand why people insist on using Adobe products. They are a pain to administer, and not particularly useful. Rather than concentrate on MS, why doesn't the EU take a look at a real threat, Adobe.
No no. The American response is:
Class action lawsuit.
If I didn't have free coffee with unlimited and unfiltered access to the Internet at work, I would need to find another job.
Never underestimate the stupidity of a government run by two or three people.
And you can't help but trip over the brothels. They're everywhere.
The Internet comes to mind.