I gave it my first and last name, and it came up with nothing. Then, I gave it my complete name. It took my middle name (David) added "Baltimore" as a random last name and gave me facts about somebody named David Baltimore. Absolute, utter, meaningless gibberish. I am not impressed.
I get certificate warnings for internal sites, inside the firewall, without having accessed anything external.
BTDTGTTS. Not only that, it was when I was doing tech support for an ISP! Not only couldn't the mucking forons get their acts together to renew all of the out-of-date certs on our intranet, they'd locked our machines down so badly that every time you rebooted, you'd have to go through the same song and dance again, telling IE (No, we couldn't use Netscape on those pages and Firefox wasn't out yet.) to import all those bad certs. And, of course, NT4 was so unstable that you'd either have to restart or power cycle three or four times a day. Not having to deal with that was almost worth getting laid off when they outsourced Tech Support to India.
most would agree that the thing is a living human whenever the egg is fertilized
From everything that I've seen, most people who support abortion would disagree with you. They think that a fetus doesn't become a human being until birth.
Full support, for a free software advocate, would be for the driver itself to be free.
I use Linux and have an nVidia card. Last I checked, nVidia didn't charge me anything for the drivers. They are free; free as in beer. They're not Open Source, so you might not consider them free as in speech, but they most definitely are free as in beer.
Purity is a matter of principles, as in following a pre-conceived notion of what is "right".
Interesting. From where I sit, it looks more like idealism and purists as people who have decided that "in a perfect world" all software would be free and then set out to force this into effect in this clearly imperfect world. Thank you for a different perspective on the question.
A pragmatist will say XYZ is impossible until an idealist proves him/her wrong, and after that the pragmatist starts taking advantage of the progress done by the idealist.
I hate to be the one that breaks it to you, but the word "pragmatist" doesn't mean anything like what you think it does. In fact, to one who does know what it means, what you wrote is little more than gibberish.
the argument could be made that the document was leaked through a different source, run through the algorithm, and coincidentally matched the "signature" of the leaker's copy.
It's not enough to show that there's another possible explanation, you have to show that your story is just as reasonable as the DA's. Your lawyer has to raise reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury to get them to vote not guilty. And, do you really think the jury's going to find your claim reasonable? I sure don't!
There's a slight misunderstanding here: I wasn't suggesting using a live CD instead of a virus checker running under Windows, I was suggesting it as a "last resort" when other scanners/checkers are unable to do the job. Yes, it's a bit of work (Not that much, really, once you have the CD set up.) but it's a lot better than nuking, paving and reinstalling.
They are to ISPs what the BOFH is to a proper IT manager.
From what you write, and what I've heard elsewhere, Godaddy acts the way it does because its employees just don't know any better. That's not being a BOFH, or even a PFY; it's just being a bunch of pointy-haired lusers.
the only purely US beachhead (Omaha) was the biggest disaster out the lot with 4,500 US soldiers dead vs. only 1,200 Germans.
Before you go badmouthing the US again over D Day, there are two things you might want to take into account. (Or not, if you prefer being an ignorant bigot.) First, Gold, Sword and Juno beaches were nice and level, with ample access to the land behind it, while Omaha was backed by cliffs with only limited, narrow exits, well defended by the Germans. Second, Omaha Beach was the one place in Normandy that you could be sure would be picked for a landing, if there were one in Normandy at all. Thus, it was not only one of the hardest beaches to exit, it was also, by far, the best defended. The important thing about Omaha Beach isn't that there were so many US casualties, but that under the above circumstances, there were so few. It could easily have been worse; if Rommel had been in tactical control and allowed to use the troops as he saw fit, he might actually have driven the landing back into the sea at Omaha, unlike every place else.
Can they prevent you from booting from a CD? If so, color me impressed. If not, you can always boot from a live CD with some form of Linux on it and ClamAV. Use that to clean up your system, then reboot into Windows.
My way of saying this is, "I don't need to see the pimples on the porn stars butt".
You might not, and I certainly don't, but I have a friend who's interests are exceptionally "backal" who'd probably appreciate that type of detail. Ugol's Law implies that there are at least a few people out there looking for that in their pr0n. Have you considered an alternate page that caters to them?
You do know, don't you, that before the Hundred Years War the English owned Normandy and other bits and pieces of what's now Western France? The reason they don't still is because the French gradually kicked them out.
I mean the building is completely empty and naked!
I didn't RTFA or watch the video, but now I'm tempted. After all, what geek can possibly resist a video about anything that's naked, even a building? Pr0n!
Oddly enough (and assuming you meant to write "flammable" instead of "inflammable"),
Why? Inflammable means easily set on fire, not fireproof. "Flammable" is a neologism created by people who clearly made the same wrong (but reasonable) assumption that you just did.
Then why are there still fires associated with Earthquakes?
Let's say that you and your MOTAS are having a romantic candlelight dinner when the earthquake hits. All it takes is one of the candles falling on the right spot and you've got an earthquake-caused fire even if it's an all-electric home. Or, if you prefer, you're making fish and chips and the quake spills the grease from the fryer onto a hot burner. There are lots of ways to start a fire during an earthquake even if the gas (if you have it) turns off. And, of course, there's always the gas inside the pipes that can get out even after the shutoff valve activates.
How many of the climate models used to predict global warming have been open sourced?
I've got a better question: if you gave all of those models data about how the climate was 20 years ago and let them run, how many of them would predict the present correctly? AFAIK, not one. If they can't predict the present, why should we believe what they say about the future?
Personally? Well, that's hard to say, because I don't know how much (if any) of my tax money has been poured down that particular rat hole, but I'll bet it's affected the price of gasolene, and not to lower it.
As far as the warmer climate giving you water problems, I live near Los Angeles, and we've got similar problems, although probably not as bad as yours. Of course, LA usually does have a limited water supply, being that the area is naturally a semi-desert. Be that as it may, it might have been more accurate to have written that "a warmer climate brings a longer growing season, which can (other factors permitting) lead to bigger harvests, providing more fuel for the legions." It's the same basic idea, just amplified a little.
I think you're missing my point here. My comment had nothing to do with the security of electronic voting; it had to do with who's responsible for what was found. All we know for certain is that those computers had some faked results on them. We don't know, yet, who did it or why. The ex-president might have had it done to rig the election. The machines might have been planted by his enemies after he was deposed to make sure he wouldn't be called back.
I'm just curious as to how this money making scheme works. I mean is it just money for speeches? Is it money for research into better energy efficiency?
That's a good question. From where I sit, there are several ways. There's the people who get money for making speeches promoting it, there's people writing books proclaiming Doom And Gloom if we don't Do Something and there are people sponging off of grants by running "studies" designed not to find out what's happening but to "prove" that AGW is TRUE. And, of course, there are the grifters selling carbon credits and running other money making schemes predicated on the claim that AGW is a fact. One obvious example is Al Gore. How much of his income over the last several years has come from promoting AGW?
I won't say that everybody involved is just in it for the money; I'm sure there are a number of True Believers out there, but I do think that the main motive behind all the frenzy has been money.
The hoax I was referring to wasn't the claim that it's getting warmer, it's that the change is man made. Yes, the climate is changing, but so what? It's always changing. 200 years ago, it was much cooler; 1000 years ago it was somewhat warmer than it is now. It may have been about this warm between about 200 BCE and 100 CE, fueling the rise of the Roman Empire (A warmer climate brings bigger harvests, providing more food to feed the legions.) and then gotten cooler again, causing its decline. I doubt even the most fanatic AGW evangelist would claim those changes were mostly man-made, and I don't personally believe that what's happening now is, either. However, as long as there's a way to extract money from people by preaching AGW, there will be people doing it, and the moment it stops bringing in cash is when they'll stop.
Slashdot Mirror
I gave it my first and last name, and it came up with nothing. Then, I gave it my complete name. It took my middle name (David) added "Baltimore" as a random last name and gave me facts about somebody named David Baltimore. Absolute, utter, meaningless gibberish. I am not impressed.
BTDTGTTS. Not only that, it was when I was doing tech support for an ISP! Not only couldn't the mucking forons get their acts together to renew all of the out-of-date certs on our intranet, they'd locked our machines down so badly that every time you rebooted, you'd have to go through the same song and dance again, telling IE (No, we couldn't use Netscape on those pages and Firefox wasn't out yet.) to import all those bad certs. And, of course, NT4 was so unstable that you'd either have to restart or power cycle three or four times a day. Not having to deal with that was almost worth getting laid off when they outsourced Tech Support to India.
From everything that I've seen, most people who support abortion would disagree with you. They think that a fetus doesn't become a human being until birth.
And how long do you think that would go on before somebody charged them with creating security holes that only their own techs could plug?
I don't know about anybody else, but the first thing that crossed my mind when I read your post was "conflict of interest."
I use Linux and have an nVidia card. Last I checked, nVidia didn't charge me anything for the drivers. They are free; free as in beer. They're not Open Source, so you might not consider them free as in speech, but they most definitely are free as in beer.
Interesting. From where I sit, it looks more like idealism and purists as people who have decided that "in a perfect world" all software would be free and then set out to force this into effect in this clearly imperfect world. Thank you for a different perspective on the question.
I hate to be the one that breaks it to you, but the word "pragmatist" doesn't mean anything like what you think it does. In fact, to one who does know what it means, what you wrote is little more than gibberish.
It's not enough to show that there's another possible explanation, you have to show that your story is just as reasonable as the DA's. Your lawyer has to raise reasonable doubt in the minds of the jury to get them to vote not guilty. And, do you really think the jury's going to find your claim reasonable? I sure don't!
In Soviet Russia, of course, tail chased you!
As God is my witness, I thought armadillos could fly!
There's a slight misunderstanding here: I wasn't suggesting using a live CD instead of a virus checker running under Windows, I was suggesting it as a "last resort" when other scanners/checkers are unable to do the job. Yes, it's a bit of work (Not that much, really, once you have the CD set up.) but it's a lot better than nuking, paving and reinstalling.
From what you write, and what I've heard elsewhere, Godaddy acts the way it does because its employees just don't know any better. That's not being a BOFH, or even a PFY; it's just being a bunch of pointy-haired lusers.
Before you go badmouthing the US again over D Day, there are two things you might want to take into account. (Or not, if you prefer being an ignorant bigot.) First, Gold, Sword and Juno beaches were nice and level, with ample access to the land behind it, while Omaha was backed by cliffs with only limited, narrow exits, well defended by the Germans. Second, Omaha Beach was the one place in Normandy that you could be sure would be picked for a landing, if there were one in Normandy at all. Thus, it was not only one of the hardest beaches to exit, it was also, by far, the best defended. The important thing about Omaha Beach isn't that there were so many US casualties, but that under the above circumstances, there were so few. It could easily have been worse; if Rommel had been in tactical control and allowed to use the troops as he saw fit, he might actually have driven the landing back into the sea at Omaha, unlike every place else.
Can they prevent you from booting from a CD? If so, color me impressed. If not, you can always boot from a live CD with some form of Linux on it and ClamAV. Use that to clean up your system, then reboot into Windows.
You might not, and I certainly don't, but I have a friend who's interests are exceptionally "backal" who'd probably appreciate that type of detail. Ugol's Law implies that there are at least a few people out there looking for that in their pr0n. Have you considered an alternate page that caters to them?
You do know, don't you, that before the Hundred Years War the English owned Normandy and other bits and pieces of what's now Western France? The reason they don't still is because the French gradually kicked them out.
I didn't RTFA or watch the video, but now I'm tempted. After all, what geek can possibly resist a video about anything that's naked, even a building? Pr0n!
Why? Inflammable means easily set on fire, not fireproof. "Flammable" is a neologism created by people who clearly made the same wrong (but reasonable) assumption that you just did.
Let's say that you and your MOTAS are having a romantic candlelight dinner when the earthquake hits. All it takes is one of the candles falling on the right spot and you've got an earthquake-caused fire even if it's an all-electric home. Or, if you prefer, you're making fish and chips and the quake spills the grease from the fryer onto a hot burner. There are lots of ways to start a fire during an earthquake even if the gas (if you have it) turns off. And, of course, there's always the gas inside the pipes that can get out even after the shutoff valve activates.
I've got a better question: if you gave all of those models data about how the climate was 20 years ago and let them run, how many of them would predict the present correctly? AFAIK, not one. If they can't predict the present, why should we believe what they say about the future?
Personally? Well, that's hard to say, because I don't know how much (if any) of my tax money has been poured down that particular rat hole, but I'll bet it's affected the price of gasolene, and not to lower it.
As far as the warmer climate giving you water problems, I live near Los Angeles, and we've got similar problems, although probably not as bad as yours. Of course, LA usually does have a limited water supply, being that the area is naturally a semi-desert. Be that as it may, it might have been more accurate to have written that "a warmer climate brings a longer growing season, which can (other factors permitting) lead to bigger harvests, providing more fuel for the legions." It's the same basic idea, just amplified a little.
I think you're missing my point here. My comment had nothing to do with the security of electronic voting; it had to do with who's responsible for what was found. All we know for certain is that those computers had some faked results on them. We don't know, yet, who did it or why. The ex-president might have had it done to rig the election. The machines might have been planted by his enemies after he was deposed to make sure he wouldn't be called back.
That's a good question. From where I sit, there are several ways. There's the people who get money for making speeches promoting it, there's people writing books proclaiming Doom And Gloom if we don't Do Something and there are people sponging off of grants by running "studies" designed not to find out what's happening but to "prove" that AGW is TRUE. And, of course, there are the grifters selling carbon credits and running other money making schemes predicated on the claim that AGW is a fact. One obvious example is Al Gore. How much of his income over the last several years has come from promoting AGW?
I won't say that everybody involved is just in it for the money; I'm sure there are a number of True Believers out there, but I do think that the main motive behind all the frenzy has been money.
The hoax I was referring to wasn't the claim that it's getting warmer, it's that the change is man made. Yes, the climate is changing, but so what? It's always changing. 200 years ago, it was much cooler; 1000 years ago it was somewhat warmer than it is now. It may have been about this warm between about 200 BCE and 100 CE, fueling the rise of the Roman Empire (A warmer climate brings bigger harvests, providing more food to feed the legions.) and then gotten cooler again, causing its decline. I doubt even the most fanatic AGW evangelist would claim those changes were mostly man-made, and I don't personally believe that what's happening now is, either. However, as long as there's a way to extract money from people by preaching AGW, there will be people doing it, and the moment it stops bringing in cash is when they'll stop.
It will end when it stops being profitable to those promoting it, and not one second sooner.