That's the same with me. I actually VERY much enjoy my job. I solve problems that are critical for clients, the clients really appreciate what I do and when my company got bought by (insert very large company) the directors said thank you and acknowledge I was a key person. I see interesting issues, go to site a fair amount to help out clients with their issues and get to work with interesting technology. Personally, I love it!
I'd not try to crack online services. His Linux laptop is fair game though. In fact, probably not that hard to crack. Just boot it in runlevel 1, then change the password.
"In AU they are actually sitting around and talking like civilized people (when they are nothing but, as this is pure fascism) about mandatory assessment of everyone and taxing people differently based on their results as a way to enforce norms of behaviour less stressful on their overloaded nationalized health system."
Since when? I suspect you have no idea what you are talking about.
Actually, to my mind it just shows how things haven't changed in over a decade. Sun is still the same old Sun, no matter how "open source friendly" it makes out. Just look what they did to Kohei - ignored his efforts and duplicated his work.
Your analogy of a kitchen knife is a little flawed. You don't use a machette to chop carrots. Similarly, you don't need a class IV laser to host a presentation. Similarly, cars mostly injure people because of accidents, not deliberate attacks like the spate that have been happening around airports.
To be honest, I don't really care if it was the Democrats or the Republicans who brought it domestic spying, warrantless wiretaps or even something like extraordinary rendition. However, this does rather leave viewing things in the "proper order" a bit of a moot point. I have a more nuanced view than you might realise, and I'm not actually all that ill informed about American politics. For instance, I think I might well be in that small minority of people who have actually read the entirety of the USA PATRIOT Act and have a reasonable grasp of what it does.
I notice that you try to address the issues I noted. With regards to the free speech zones: again I say - who cares what political party brought them in! They are pretty obviously unconstitutional. As others have pointed out - the whole damn United States is a free speech zone! I'm sure there are better ways of protecting your President than silencing criticism. You believe that wiretaps laws are reasonable. That's fine, but in my opinion aspects of the provisions of Title II of the Patriot Act are fairly draconian. I don't think it's right to the FBI to access voicemail through a title III wiretap order as I tend to agree with James Dempsey & co. of EPIC that it violates the 4th Amendment's expectation that authorities can give probable cause before the search and seizure of a citizens property. There are other problems, which I don't really have the time or inclination to address as a response to your comment. You can look them up if you like, I documented many of the controversies in the Wikipedia USA PATRIOT Act article.
You haven't addressed my other points, instead you wave them off to be rambling. OK, but I fear my observations stand. I do think that you are missing the bigger points, which was that I was sarcastically responding to this comment, which I acknowledge was in itself made by a shit-stirring AC.
Looks like you are upset that I might be prejudging an entire nation on the actions of it's government. Or perhaps you are just annoyed that I'm viewing your culture through the lens of my own?
I'm sorry, I thought that the argument was that Australia doesn't allow guns and is infringing on the rights of citizens. I thought that we all had our shorts in an uproar about the Aussie nanny state!
I'd like to see what sort of reaction there would be in the U.S. if we added the same checks and audits that the military and police have to those private individuals who own guns.
I am being objective. I've never needed to use a gun to defend myself, and I hope that the current state of affairs remains that way. Objectively, if only the military and law enforcement (who are fully audited and internally policed in such a way that it's difficult for them to use a gun on the civilian population) have guns, then I'm not likely to get shot by one.
I apologise for mistaking you for a yank. I never denied my bias. I'm not speaking from a script - not sure where you got that assumption. Guess I'm not the only one making assumptions here!
But I ask you, have you ever been threatened by a gun in Australia? Genuinely interested.
Your society (by which I mean the United States of America) doesn't have it perfect. I don't see why you should be lecturing to me how to create a safe society, when I can safely say that we have quite a free and non-violent society.
We don't need guns. We aren't really in all that much danger. There is still a dangerous element in our society, so our police force have guns. Big deal?
Slashdot Mirror
That's the same with me. I actually VERY much enjoy my job. I solve problems that are critical for clients, the clients really appreciate what I do and when my company got bought by (insert very large company) the directors said thank you and acknowledge I was a key person. I see interesting issues, go to site a fair amount to help out clients with their issues and get to work with interesting technology. Personally, I love it!
I'm wondering if they named it gNewSense because it's a gNuisance to not have non-free software?
Early versions of Fedora didn't.
However, you could always just rip out the hard drive and mount it on another Linux laptop.
I would have thought the executor of his estate would have access to this sort of information.
I'd not try to crack online services. His Linux laptop is fair game though. In fact, probably not that hard to crack. Just boot it in runlevel 1, then change the password.
Someone mod the parent up please.
It was modded a troll because certain moderators don't have any clue about what constitutes a troll, and what is funny.
"In AU they are actually sitting around and talking like civilized people (when they are nothing but, as this is pure fascism) about mandatory assessment of everyone and taxing people differently based on their results as a way to enforce norms of behaviour less stressful on their overloaded nationalized health system."
Since when? I suspect you have no idea what you are talking about.
Really? I was reading a Star Trek book the other day - everyone had lots of money, no war. Still hasn't happened. But I want that to happen!
I think I should give it a shot though, and write a book about how I won Lotto.
Actually, to my mind it just shows how things haven't changed in over a decade. Sun is still the same old Sun, no matter how "open source friendly" it makes out. Just look what they did to Kohei - ignored his efforts and duplicated his work.
There is a difference between malicious intent and accidental injury.
Your analogy of a kitchen knife is a little flawed. You don't use a machette to chop carrots. Similarly, you don't need a class IV laser to host a presentation. Similarly, cars mostly injure people because of accidents, not deliberate attacks like the spate that have been happening around airports.
To be honest, I don't really care if it was the Democrats or the Republicans who brought it domestic spying, warrantless wiretaps or even something like extraordinary rendition. However, this does rather leave viewing things in the "proper order" a bit of a moot point. I have a more nuanced view than you might realise, and I'm not actually all that ill informed about American politics. For instance, I think I might well be in that small minority of people who have actually read the entirety of the USA PATRIOT Act and have a reasonable grasp of what it does.
I notice that you try to address the issues I noted. With regards to the free speech zones: again I say - who cares what political party brought them in! They are pretty obviously unconstitutional. As others have pointed out - the whole damn United States is a free speech zone! I'm sure there are better ways of protecting your President than silencing criticism. You believe that wiretaps laws are reasonable. That's fine, but in my opinion aspects of the provisions of Title II of the Patriot Act are fairly draconian. I don't think it's right to the FBI to access voicemail through a title III wiretap order as I tend to agree with James Dempsey & co. of EPIC that it violates the 4th Amendment's expectation that authorities can give probable cause before the search and seizure of a citizens property. There are other problems, which I don't really have the time or inclination to address as a response to your comment. You can look them up if you like, I documented many of the controversies in the Wikipedia USA PATRIOT Act article.
You haven't addressed my other points, instead you wave them off to be rambling. OK, but I fear my observations stand. I do think that you are missing the bigger points, which was that I was sarcastically responding to this comment, which I acknowledge was in itself made by a shit-stirring AC.
Ummm... maybe governments are banning them because it's not just pilots who are in danger of being blinded by the lasers?
Looks like you are upset that I might be prejudging an entire nation on the actions of it's government. Or perhaps you are just annoyed that I'm viewing your culture through the lens of my own?
I'm sorry, I thought that the argument was that Australia doesn't allow guns and is infringing on the rights of citizens. I thought that we all had our shorts in an uproar about the Aussie nanny state!
I'd like to see what sort of reaction there would be in the U.S. if we added the same checks and audits that the military and police have to those private individuals who own guns.
I am being objective. I've never needed to use a gun to defend myself, and I hope that the current state of affairs remains that way. Objectively, if only the military and law enforcement (who are fully audited and internally policed in such a way that it's difficult for them to use a gun on the civilian population) have guns, then I'm not likely to get shot by one.
I apologise for mistaking you for a yank. I never denied my bias. I'm not speaking from a script - not sure where you got that assumption. Guess I'm not the only one making assumptions here!
But I ask you, have you ever been threatened by a gun in Australia? Genuinely interested.
Indeed, there's nothing quite so infantile as needing a weapon to feel safe... oh wait. Wrong country.
blah blah blah
Your society (by which I mean the United States of America) doesn't have it perfect. I don't see why you should be lecturing to me how to create a safe society, when I can safely say that we have quite a free and non-violent society.
We don't need guns. We aren't really in all that much danger. There is still a dangerous element in our society, so our police force have guns. Big deal?
If PETA is the result, then I think we all could do with a little less progress.
Or you could sell your children for food. That would kill two birds with the one stone.
Oh won't somebody PLEASE eat the above poster?
Sir, you have all the random stupidity of PETA without the fun bits.
Maybe they do. There's no way I'd call what Mcdonalds serves "real" food.
Those are deep thoughts. I suppose the next stage of the thought experiment is whether PETA will then try to kill those making the fake meat.
I wonder when we can create fake PETA activists in the lab? Better than the real thing! Tastier too.