I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Exactly what truths are others being deprived of? One thing religion provides is an external arbitrator of truths, an objective, by definition, right or wrong. Without it, there are no absolute truths and everything is subjective or relevant. As such, truth, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I'm not making a point in favor of religion. I'm simply pointing out that you can't deprive others of truth if there are no absolute truths. Maybe a more accurate statement would be I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of their freedom. While not the same intention, it would at least be congruent.
While I agree with what you are saying and those skills are necessary to being successful in IT, it doesn't mean that being in the military makes one proficient in the field --- unless they had actual training in IT related assignments. Yes, today's soldier uses a lot more technology than 20 years ago, but then again so do our kids. Just using technology doesn't mean one has the aptitude for an IT job. It is unlikely that all of the 250,000 people leaving military life each year, as mentioned in the article, can be IT professionals.
That is by no means a put down of those who serve. There are many advantages to hiring qualified ex-military, with few disadvantages. As in all hiring situations, one should look at the individual's aptitude and skills versus making general assumptions.
Well more accurately I think it is that they are denying that HIV causes AIDS.
I disagree that the deniers have moved on to something else. Shit, the Catholic church still claims condoms cause AIDS. And most of the religious right claims it only affects homosexuals.
No, the catholic church does not claim condoms cause AIDS. It does state that certain types of condoms, like lambskin and other natural conds, have microscopic pores that are too small for sperm to pass through thus preventing pregnancy but not too small for the HIV virus to pass through, thus allowing transmission of HIV. It seems that the medical community is in agreement with them on that.
The dark ages were followed by the middle ages and the Renaissance, were they not? Some might even argue that the various monasteries preserved the knowledge and history from then and ancient times and without them, there would have been no age of enlightenment (or beer).
Whatever happened to the Land of the Free? Government backdoors into consumer devices are anything but Free. There was a time that you were presumed innocent until proven guilty.
...and some airlines are balking, since the problem has never been seen in operation, that the order presents "a high, and unnecessary, financial burden on operators
We should thank secular values for keeping religion in check and forcing its reformation. BTW islam needs a deep reformation too ASAP if you didn't notice.
lol In the West, secular values are Judea-Christian values. You can't separate one from the other, no matter how hard you try.
Sorry, but the arrow of progress usually comes from ideas outside of religion or at least outside of the fundamental, literal interpretation of religious texts. Democracy is not a Judea-Christian value, we got that from the greeks. And not from their religious beliefs, but rather from their philosophers. While there were Christians who fought slavery, the idea that slavery is immoral is not based on the Jewish nor Christian sacred texts which explain in detail who can be a slave, and how to treat slaves. 10 commandments, none of them even hint that slavery is bad. Gay rights? Nope. Women's equality? Nope. Religious freedom? Nope? Freedom of speech? Nope. Secular western society is a direct result of The Enlightenment which was not based on Christian theology, even though many of the participants were Christian. The Enlightenment was based on the belief that humans were capable of understanding how the world works and that we could and should use that knowledge to improve life before death. The Enlightenment encouraged questioning long held beliefs and assumptions.
Modern society is built upon The Enlightenment. So called Judeo-Christian values have evolved in response to The Enlightenment. Not the other way around.
But suppose you could. Why would one group's secular values be any better or worse than another's? Why would your secular values be better than Islam's religious values?
If you mean in some magical sense where the universe or reality at its core cares one way or another, no values are better than other values. But I assure you, some values lead to more flourishing and some values lead to more suffering.
Western society didn't rely on the Greeks until the Holy Roman Empire became Western society, so while Greek philosophy is part of our modern culture, it's because the Catholic Church embraced it that made it so.
And while modern society was built on the Enlightenment, it was based on the prior periods that were again under church influence? Why do we not marry first-cousins? Not because we discovered genetics because of the Enlightenment, but because long before religion said not to do so. Why do we have hospitals, orphanages, universities and legal systems? Again, not because of the enlightenment, but because the Catholic and later Anglican churches said to do so. Why do we care about the poor and homeless? Again, not the enlightenment or secular values, but deeply ingrained religious values handed down from generation to generation.
Not to be an apologist for the catholics, but you can't ignore the impact they had on Western civilization. One could even argue that if it weren't for them the Enlightenment would never had happened. Remember, unlike other denominations, they are the ones that upheld faith AND reason, not just faith alone.
Regardless, since culture and values are handed down from one generation to the next. The fact that in the past that culture and value system was heavily influenced by religion means that even today, our modern society is tainted by it. You simply cannot escape it. Don't get me wrong, all sorts of terrible things have been done in the name of religion but that doesn't mean that today's mores are not still influenced by that religion. Even the United States Constitution includes a freedom to express one's faith without government interference. If the US is the epitome of western society and values, it's first principle even deals with religion.
We are all products of our culture and our culture includes Judea-Christian values, whether we ourselves share those religious beliefs or not.
Oh really?! You must be either ignorant, republican, a troll, in bad faith or all of them. Bye troll.
Actually, none of the above. However, one has to take a pretty twisted view of history to ignore the shaping of Western society, for better or worse, because of religious influence. Doesn't make that influence right or wrong, but if you can't even admit its influence, then that speaks more to your own bias than to religion's.
So. back then Sunni and shitte muslims could live with each other without killing each other too.
That doesn't happen today either. Every muslims country is 90% one and 10% of the other. and the other always is pushed down.
I don't think that is unique to Muslims. Pretty much any group that espouses a particular ideology, once it obtains a majority, will use their power to keep and expand it. The ideology doesn't have to be based on religion. It could be political, economic, social, or whatever. When groups value their ideology more than they value people, bad things will always happen.
We should thank secular values for keeping religion in check and forcing its reformation. BTW islam needs a deep reformation too ASAP if you didn't notice.
lol In the West, secular values are Judea-Christian values. You can't separate one from the other, no matter how hard you try. But suppose you could. Why would one group's secular values be any better or worse than another's? Why would your secular values be better than Islam's religious values?
Nobody actually said that Linux is more secure. What has been said that security flaws are more likely to be reported and patched before they are exploited. The reason Windows doesn't have problems like this is because they really do. However, Microsoft is very good about non-disclosure agreements and the like. But, security by obscurity isn't really security. It's just marketing and wishful thinking.
As for being burned by this, it hasn't happened. The flaw has been there for 22 years and yet not one exploit has been noted. Nobody has been burned by this because of the difficulty in actually exploiting it (without have physical access to the machine). Should this bug be there? No, of course not. But it is the open source nature of linux that led to this even being reported.
But again, why is it only automobile franchises that are the problem and not all fast food and retail franchises that are anti-competitive?
You have no idea what you're talking about. McDonald's can own stores and franchise the brand at the same time - nobody cares. I have no problem with auto dealers - the issue is that if Tesla wants to sell directly then they should be able to. The only reason to disallow it is to limit competition for entrenched players.
By the way, thanks for playing the part described above. If not you, somebody else would have. But you folks are always good for a laugh.
Tesla isn't wanting to set up their own Tesla owned dealerships. They are wanting to skip the dealership all together. Given the volume of vehicles they are planning on producing, that makes sense from a business perspective. Delorean tried the same thing, which is one of the reasons states without automobile dealer franchise laws added them and those with them, strengthen them.
Yes, people could take their Delorean to a regular mechanic to work on it (and had to in many states). However, that same mechanic can refuse to work on it. A dealer's mechanic can't and they must service the car. Like it or not, those laws were put into place for consumer protection and to protect the franchise owner from the manufacture. Whether they are still needed or not today, is open for debate. However, Tesla could easily get around the law by selling franchises for $1 each. The fact that they are willing to spend a lot of money on attorney fees to challenge the laws probably means there is some other reason they don't want to do that. That's the question people should be asking.
Wikis let anybody add and edit data. That is there strength and their weakness. That might be good in some situations, but probably not with business policies and the like. In a business setting, maybe something like Wordpress would suit your needs better as you can imbed multimedia in it. If you have more advanced needs, then maybe Drupal would work.
Fucking Linux. NEVER AGAIN. At least with mswin, my stations will auto-update. (Not to mention they never would have had such a bone-headed obvious hole to start with.) Christ, even my headless server stations that I never thought I'd have to fuck with again are vulnerable. Goddmammit. This could even compromise accounts I have on remote servers if they are not keeping up-to-the-minute updates. I guess you get what you pay for. Caveat Emptor. I just never thought it would come back to bite me so hard. I suppose you never do.
What makes you think Windows doesn't have problems like this? The difference is that being open source third parties can review the code and find problems. There is no way to keep them secret and from the public. Also, fixes were pushed out within hours of notification.
Look at it this way. BASH has had this problem evidently for years and there haven't been any exploits. It was discovered by researchers analyzing the code. In an MSoft world, where nobody has access to the code but MSoft, the public finds out about security holes after they have been exploited. So I agree, Caveat Emptor.
You thought you could run a totally free hobbyist OS and have it be as secure as one done by paid professionals?
Be glad its there for you to use at all. People donate their time and energy to it. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
Some would argue that Mac OS X isn't a totally free hobbyist OS and yet, with all of their paid professionals, they have yet to patch the bug. On the other hand, Linux being a free hobbyist OS means that researchers have the ability to scan the code and discover these types of holes. Something that is impossible for closed systems.
If the dealer requirement is removed so direct sells are allowed, expect an influx of inexpensive vehicles from SE Asia with no means of warranty repair or service. Yes, buyer be ware, but really, is it a good idea for the masses to be purchasing vehicles from Amazon?
Strangely, this anarchic sale of cars direct to the public by manufacturers that provide no after sales support has not happened in California. California would provide the best market for this activity, being on the west coast, with a large market.
That is because for the other 49 states, it applies. It wouldn't be a good business model to piss off your other dealers by selling direct in California. Effectively you would be in competition with them. Then, if they changed to other brands, you'd be without a network and the other states don't allow direct sales.
However, as you point out, CA doesn't have this requirement and yet, how many dealerships are franchises versus factory owned and is the level of service significantly different. I would guess not, but the manufactures still use franchised dealerships because it is a much more efficient model for delivering product, produces franchise revenues and it is less costly, in the long run, than owning the dealership itself.
A little research would tell you that in the early days of the automobile industry, there were 100s of manufactures who would sell their vehicle by mail order and it would arrive by train. However, once this very expensive piece of machinery was in the hands of the consumer, there was no way to solve problems. In addition, many of the manufacturers didn't last very long and the consumer was stuck with a vehicle that couldn't be serviced or repaired. So laws were enacted to protect consumers, including required dealerships.
And if it had only worked.
I buy new cars, and unless it is a warranty replacement item where I have to go to a dealership, they are the absolute last place I ever take a vehicle, overpriced, and completely untrustworthy. And when I do have to go there, I watch them like a hawk.
There is a reason that they are at the bottom of the teast trusted professions below even congressmen! They earned that lack of trust one customer at a time.
So I'm not certain I'd defend car dealerships protectionist racket too much. Tesla might be on more than just electric cars, they might be on a more ethical warranty/repair paradigm.
Do you think if the manufacturers owned the dealerships directly, it would change the support? Do you think it would stimulate competition? In otherwords, is the franchise system the problem or the shoddy ethics of the people working there? Obviously, the manufacturers are aware of the opinion of their franchise dealers and don't do anything about it. Why would anyone think that having the dealer directly own the dealership make any difference?
Slashdot Mirror
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
Exactly what truths are others being deprived of? One thing religion provides is an external arbitrator of truths, an objective, by definition, right or wrong. Without it, there are no absolute truths and everything is subjective or relevant. As such, truth, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. I'm not making a point in favor of religion. I'm simply pointing out that you can't deprive others of truth if there are no absolute truths. Maybe a more accurate statement would be I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of their freedom. While not the same intention, it would at least be congruent.
and boatloads of caffeine. for that extra little bit of height that you can lord over your siblings.
Actually, it's been shown that caffeine (and nicotine) stunts growth.
The other 80% is explained by eating your vegetables. Thanks mom.
Probably more likely that it would be eating high protein sources.
While I agree with what you are saying and those skills are necessary to being successful in IT, it doesn't mean that being in the military makes one proficient in the field --- unless they had actual training in IT related assignments. Yes, today's soldier uses a lot more technology than 20 years ago, but then again so do our kids. Just using technology doesn't mean one has the aptitude for an IT job. It is unlikely that all of the 250,000 people leaving military life each year, as mentioned in the article, can be IT professionals.
That is by no means a put down of those who serve. There are many advantages to hiring qualified ex-military, with few disadvantages. As in all hiring situations, one should look at the individual's aptitude and skills versus making general assumptions.
Well more accurately I think it is that they are denying that HIV causes AIDS.
I disagree that the deniers have moved on to something else. Shit, the Catholic church still claims condoms cause AIDS. And most of the religious right claims it only affects homosexuals.
No, the catholic church does not claim condoms cause AIDS. It does state that certain types of condoms, like lambskin and other natural conds, have microscopic pores that are too small for sperm to pass through thus preventing pregnancy but not too small for the HIV virus to pass through, thus allowing transmission of HIV. It seems that the medical community is in agreement with them on that.
The dark ages were followed by the middle ages and the Renaissance, were they not? Some might even argue that the various monasteries preserved the knowledge and history from then and ancient times and without them, there would have been no age of enlightenment (or beer).
No, even in Fords internal tests 8 out of 11 rear end collision crash tests at 31 MPH with Pinto resulted in gas tank rupture and fuel dumping out.
But the $1 shield per vehicle was deemed too expensive, which the jury decided otherwise.
Whatever happened to the Land of the Free? Government backdoors into consumer devices are anything but Free. There was a time that you were presumed innocent until proven guilty.
...and some airlines are balking, since the problem has never been seen in operation, that the order presents "a high, and unnecessary, financial burden on operators
Did Ford try that argument with exploding Pintos?
We should thank secular values for keeping religion in check and forcing its reformation. BTW islam needs a deep reformation too ASAP if you didn't notice.
lol
In the West, secular values are Judea-Christian values. You can't separate one from the other, no matter how hard you try.
Sorry, but the arrow of progress usually comes from ideas outside of religion or at least outside of the fundamental, literal interpretation of religious texts. Democracy is not a Judea-Christian value, we got that from the greeks. And not from their religious beliefs, but rather from their philosophers. While there were Christians who fought slavery, the idea that slavery is immoral is not based on the Jewish nor Christian sacred texts which explain in detail who can be a slave, and how to treat slaves. 10 commandments, none of them even hint that slavery is bad. Gay rights? Nope. Women's equality? Nope. Religious freedom? Nope? Freedom of speech? Nope. Secular western society is a direct result of The Enlightenment which was not based on Christian theology, even though many of the participants were Christian. The Enlightenment was based on the belief that humans were capable of understanding how the world works and that we could and should use that knowledge to improve life before death. The Enlightenment encouraged questioning long held beliefs and assumptions.
Modern society is built upon The Enlightenment. So called Judeo-Christian values have evolved in response to The Enlightenment. Not the other way around.
But suppose you could. Why would one group's secular values be any better or worse than another's? Why would your secular values be better than Islam's religious values?
If you mean in some magical sense where the universe or reality at its core cares one way or another, no values are better than other values. But I assure you, some values lead to more flourishing and some values lead to more suffering.
Western society didn't rely on the Greeks until the Holy Roman Empire became Western society, so while Greek philosophy is part of our modern culture, it's because the Catholic Church embraced it that made it so.
And while modern society was built on the Enlightenment, it was based on the prior periods that were again under church influence? Why do we not marry first-cousins? Not because we discovered genetics because of the Enlightenment, but because long before religion said not to do so. Why do we have hospitals, orphanages, universities and legal systems? Again, not because of the enlightenment, but because the Catholic and later Anglican churches said to do so. Why do we care about the poor and homeless? Again, not the enlightenment or secular values, but deeply ingrained religious values handed down from generation to generation.
Not to be an apologist for the catholics, but you can't ignore the impact they had on Western civilization. One could even argue that if it weren't for them the Enlightenment would never had happened. Remember, unlike other denominations, they are the ones that upheld faith AND reason, not just faith alone.
Regardless, since culture and values are handed down from one generation to the next. The fact that in the past that culture and value system was heavily influenced by religion means that even today, our modern society is tainted by it. You simply cannot escape it. Don't get me wrong, all sorts of terrible things have been done in the name of religion but that doesn't mean that today's mores are not still influenced by that religion. Even the United States Constitution includes a freedom to express one's faith without government interference. If the US is the epitome of western society and values, it's first principle even deals with religion.
We are all products of our culture and our culture includes Judea-Christian values, whether we ourselves share those religious beliefs or not.
Oh really?! You must be either ignorant, republican, a troll, in bad faith or all of them. Bye troll.
Actually, none of the above. However, one has to take a pretty twisted view of history to ignore the shaping of Western society, for better or worse, because of religious influence. Doesn't make that influence right or wrong, but if you can't even admit its influence, then that speaks more to your own bias than to religion's.
Wilson's goal is still to render government gun regulation useless, even as debate rages on banning this kind of manufacturing
Or he will wake the sleeping giant and increased regulation will proliferate!
So. back then Sunni and shitte muslims could live with each other without killing each other too.
That doesn't happen today either. Every muslims country is 90% one and 10% of the other. and the other always is pushed down.
I don't think that is unique to Muslims. Pretty much any group that espouses a particular ideology, once it obtains a majority, will use their power to keep and expand it. The ideology doesn't have to be based on religion. It could be political, economic, social, or whatever. When groups value their ideology more than they value people, bad things will always happen.
We should thank secular values for keeping religion in check and forcing its reformation. BTW islam needs a deep reformation too ASAP if you didn't notice.
lol
In the West, secular values are Judea-Christian values. You can't separate one from the other, no matter how hard you try. But suppose you could. Why would one group's secular values be any better or worse than another's? Why would your secular values be better than Islam's religious values?
second update: apple pushed a patch today. so much for your +5 haterade.
I don't hate apple, I was just pointing out to the AC that OS X was not a free hobby OS and it was impacted, too.
never had problems like this with CCP.
How do you know? CP/M had a shorter market life than it took to discover this bug.
Nobody actually said that Linux is more secure. What has been said that security flaws are more likely to be reported and patched before they are exploited. The reason Windows doesn't have problems like this is because they really do. However, Microsoft is very good about non-disclosure agreements and the like. But, security by obscurity isn't really security. It's just marketing and wishful thinking.
As for being burned by this, it hasn't happened. The flaw has been there for 22 years and yet not one exploit has been noted. Nobody has been burned by this because of the difficulty in actually exploiting it (without have physical access to the machine). Should this bug be there? No, of course not. But it is the open source nature of linux that led to this even being reported.
But again, why is it only automobile franchises that are the problem and not all fast food and retail franchises that are anti-competitive?
You have no idea what you're talking about. McDonald's can own stores and franchise the brand at the same time - nobody cares. I have no problem with auto dealers - the issue is that if Tesla wants to sell directly then they should be able to. The only reason to disallow it is to limit competition for entrenched players.
By the way, thanks for playing the part described above. If not you, somebody else would have. But you folks are always good for a laugh.
Tesla isn't wanting to set up their own Tesla owned dealerships. They are wanting to skip the dealership all together. Given the volume of vehicles they are planning on producing, that makes sense from a business perspective. Delorean tried the same thing, which is one of the reasons states without automobile dealer franchise laws added them and those with them, strengthen them.
Yes, people could take their Delorean to a regular mechanic to work on it (and had to in many states). However, that same mechanic can refuse to work on it. A dealer's mechanic can't and they must service the car. Like it or not, those laws were put into place for consumer protection and to protect the franchise owner from the manufacture. Whether they are still needed or not today, is open for debate. However, Tesla could easily get around the law by selling franchises for $1 each. The fact that they are willing to spend a lot of money on attorney fees to challenge the laws probably means there is some other reason they don't want to do that. That's the question people should be asking.
Wikis let anybody add and edit data. That is there strength and their weakness. That might be good in some situations, but probably not with business policies and the like. In a business setting, maybe something like Wordpress would suit your needs better as you can imbed multimedia in it. If you have more advanced needs, then maybe Drupal would work.
Fucking Linux. NEVER AGAIN. At least with mswin, my stations will auto-update. (Not to mention they never would have had such a bone-headed obvious hole to start with.) Christ, even my headless server stations that I never thought I'd have to fuck with again are vulnerable. Goddmammit. This could even compromise accounts I have on remote servers if they are not keeping up-to-the-minute updates. I guess you get what you pay for. Caveat Emptor. I just never thought it would come back to bite me so hard. I suppose you never do.
What makes you think Windows doesn't have problems like this? The difference is that being open source third parties can review the code and find problems. There is no way to keep them secret and from the public. Also, fixes were pushed out within hours of notification.
Look at it this way. BASH has had this problem evidently for years and there haven't been any exploits. It was discovered by researchers analyzing the code. In an MSoft world, where nobody has access to the code but MSoft, the public finds out about security holes after they have been exploited. So I agree, Caveat Emptor.
You thought you could run a totally free hobbyist OS and have it be as secure as one done by paid professionals?
Be glad its there for you to use at all. People donate their time and energy to it. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth.
Some would argue that Mac OS X isn't a totally free hobbyist OS and yet, with all of their paid professionals, they have yet to patch the bug. On the other hand, Linux being a free hobbyist OS means that researchers have the ability to scan the code and discover these types of holes. Something that is impossible for closed systems.
Strangely, this anarchic sale of cars direct to the public by manufacturers that provide no after sales support has not happened in California. California would provide the best market for this activity, being on the west coast, with a large market.
That is because for the other 49 states, it applies. It wouldn't be a good business model to piss off your other dealers by selling direct in California. Effectively you would be in competition with them. Then, if they changed to other brands, you'd be without a network and the other states don't allow direct sales.
However, as you point out, CA doesn't have this requirement and yet, how many dealerships are franchises versus factory owned and is the level of service significantly different. I would guess not, but the manufactures still use franchised dealerships because it is a much more efficient model for delivering product, produces franchise revenues and it is less costly, in the long run, than owning the dealership itself.
You might be interested in a reproduction.
Yeah, I saw that, too. However, I'm not that nostalgic! Thanks! :)
Computers Shmomputers, when I was a kid this is what we used to learn programming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...
I actually received one of those as a Christmas present back in 1966! It actually was a good learning experience and fun for a nerdy kid.
A little research would tell you that in the early days of the automobile industry, there were 100s of manufactures who would sell their vehicle by mail order and it would arrive by train. However, once this very expensive piece of machinery was in the hands of the consumer, there was no way to solve problems. In addition, many of the manufacturers didn't last very long and the consumer was stuck with a vehicle that couldn't be serviced or repaired. So laws were enacted to protect consumers, including required dealerships.
And if it had only worked.
I buy new cars, and unless it is a warranty replacement item where I have to go to a dealership, they are the absolute last place I ever take a vehicle, overpriced, and completely untrustworthy. And when I do have to go there, I watch them like a hawk.
There is a reason that they are at the bottom of the teast trusted professions below even congressmen! They earned that lack of trust one customer at a time.
So I'm not certain I'd defend car dealerships protectionist racket too much. Tesla might be on more than just electric cars, they might be on a more ethical warranty/repair paradigm.
Do you think if the manufacturers owned the dealerships directly, it would change the support? Do you think it would stimulate competition? In otherwords, is the franchise system the problem or the shoddy ethics of the people working there? Obviously, the manufacturers are aware of the opinion of their franchise dealers and don't do anything about it. Why would anyone think that having the dealer directly own the dealership make any difference?