When a leader lies under oath, then lies to the entire country in speeches.... it's more a sign of bad judgement than anything else. I thought Clinton was 'progressive.' If he were 'progressive' he would have said 'yeah, I get blow jobs all the time. Hillary and I have an open marriage. What of it?'
Instead, he turned out to be just another lying SOB.
The point was, any idiot anywhere should be aware that crack is the smokable form of cocaine. Reading one or two news articles about the 'crack epidemic' would be enough to know that.
Ask me why the hell I am replying to an A.C., though?
You worded that 'Let's progress forward, please' like it involved you doing part of the work. Sorry, my mistake. You'll do damned well as a 'team leader' with that attitude, though. Working on your MBA?
80% of the talented foreign students are being allowed in. What percentage was being let in before the new emphasis on security isn't mentioned.
And: researchers are avoiding work with dangerous pathogens, choosing more innocuous micro-organisms. Duh! why use the dangerous pathgens if there are more innocuous alternatives?
But really your comment was just a politically motivated slam against the members of the Bush administration who have been deemed 'best target' by the DNC.
No. It's really disappointing how many people just name-drop 'Orwell' without, it seems, even knowing what the themes were in his book.
In Orwell's world, every room had a camera in it, and everybody had to assume they were being watched at all times. Children's loyalty to their families was stripped away and they were encouraged to spy on their parents. Language itself had become a pliable tool of 'the party' and meanings were flexible. History was no longer objective, but re-interpreted to reflect the values and aims of whomever was in power.
Sounds a heck of a lot like the world a lot of zealots, both of the left and the right, strive for, eh?
You are acting like 'diversity' is some sort of panacea. That 'diversity' would solve many of the 'nets problems. It would solve a few problems, but the more 'diverse' the computer software on the 'net becomes, the more interoperability problems will rear their ugly heads. If there are 600 different types of machines all with their own quirks, warts, and 'extended functionality' features vying for customers to use them, new and potentially worse problems will surface.
Just be more realistic. The 'diversity' metaphor, which borrows on the fact of 'bio-diversity' only has a certain amount of merit. Diversity won't cure all problems, and in fact new problems will surface if and when it becomes the state of affairs.
No. The 'plausible deniability' inherent in Rubberhose means that they can't know wether you have two or twelve or fifty different items of infomation stored in an area of the drive. So you can give them the key for areas X and Y on the drive, but there aren't discrete boundraies for valid data (as opposed to the noise data) on the drive that they know as areas A, B, and C. So you can deny those areas exist, claiming you gave them the only key. There's no way for them to know that you've given them every key.
It sounds like what you're saying is that because you've remapped your keyboard to Dvorak, you're so pitifully slow at hunt-and-peck typing that a scrambled keyboard wouldn't really make you type any slower than you already do.
However, having the ability to look at the URL provided in a piece of spam, look up the WHOIS data listed, and file a complaint and/or start a campaign against that business/individual...
There's good reason for us to start using the WHOIS data to punish spammers and/or the interests they spam on the behalf of.
Being able to do this just requires one mechanism which is already in place: validation of the contact info, and enforcement of it's accuracy.
Why is this any more 'extreme' than most of the other anti-spam measures people advocate?
Just because it CAN be done is a cool enough reason to do it for some of us.
I run NetBSD and X11 on a Macintosh SE/30. With it's tiny little black and white screen. It's so cramped that I have to run the Tab Window Manager (TWM) because FVWM has too much 'eye candy' and crowds the windows.
I could go to an auction here and get a Pentium 100 box for one buck (sometimes that price for a whole pallet of Pentium 100s) if I wanted to just run a freenix on cheap hardware (a Mac SE/30 isn't even particularly cheap, with all the motherfuckers who are stripping the hardware out to make fricking aquariums out of the cases).
The PCJr. will be a particular challange. Not only doesn't it have memory protection, it doesn't even have a DMA controller.
Every disk fetch and all I/O on a PCJr. has to pass through the CPU's registers. There are special kludges and BIOS 'features' in the junior that make it capable of even running DOS.
It makes for a glacially slow machine. I used to be fond of running 3-Demon on my PCJr. The machine was so slow that if you turned to face down a long hall of the 3-D wire-framed game, the rendering of the wireframe would significantly bog down the game.
I guess I'm weird that way, that I consider that 'cool.'
I am lazy about futzing around with Slip, and always throw an ancient ethernet card into a similarly ancient machine that I want to install a freenix on, and install from an NFS server.
That was an early winning point for NetBSD, in fact. It has/had(?) FAR better integration of PCMCIA into the base kernal, so it was trivial to install NetBSD on any old laptop, so long as it had PCMCIA. Linux at the time had it's PCMCIA support as a pasted-on kludge, which made it a horrible hack to install Slackware.
Who cares about 'the linux GUI experience' in the first place??
My Window Manager of Choice is still eXceed on Windows 2000. Putty is pretty damn good terminal interface for non-gui tasks. And I do a LOT of things on the Linux and NetBSD boxes on my network.
I was about to comment that this seemed like a pretty redundant 'news' topic, as there has been Microchannel support in Linux for a few years now. But maybe this has to do with the Model 30 or something?
Slashdot Mirror
When a leader lies under oath, then lies to the entire country in speeches.... it's more a sign of bad judgement than anything else. I thought Clinton was 'progressive.' If he were 'progressive' he would have said 'yeah, I get blow jobs all the time. Hillary and I have an open marriage. What of it?'
Instead, he turned out to be just another lying SOB.
But this is drifting WAAY off topic.
The point was, any idiot anywhere should be aware that crack is the smokable form of cocaine. Reading one or two news articles about the 'crack epidemic' would be enough to know that.
Ask me why the hell I am replying to an A.C., though?
*shrug*
You worded that 'Let's progress forward, please' like it involved you doing part of the work. Sorry, my mistake. You'll do damned well as a 'team leader' with that attitude, though. Working on your MBA?
Cite me an example of a 1d desktop.
Then, please tell me, if it's a 'natural progression' what a 4d and 5d desktop will look like?
Sorry. You just reminded me of that.
Shooting up crack?
Crack? The form of cocaine modified to make it a real 'rush' to smoke in a pipe?
You lead a sheltered life if you think anybody is shooting it up.
80% of the talented foreign students are being allowed in. What percentage was being let in before the new emphasis on security isn't mentioned.
And: researchers are avoiding work with dangerous pathogens, choosing more innocuous micro-organisms. Duh! why use the dangerous pathgens if there are more innocuous alternatives?
But really your comment was just a politically motivated slam against the members of the Bush administration who have been deemed 'best target' by the DNC.
No. It's really disappointing how many people just name-drop 'Orwell' without, it seems, even knowing what the themes were in his book.
In Orwell's world, every room had a camera in it, and everybody had to assume they were being watched at all times. Children's loyalty to their families was stripped away and they were encouraged to spy on their parents. Language itself had become a pliable tool of 'the party' and meanings were flexible. History was no longer objective, but re-interpreted to reflect the values and aims of whomever was in power.
Sounds a heck of a lot like the world a lot of zealots, both of the left and the right, strive for, eh?
Why do you say that? Drivers licenses haven't meant the end of rental car agencies.
In Russia they used to make big deal out of licensing all typewriters and photocopying equipment.
You are acting like 'diversity' is some sort of panacea. That 'diversity' would solve many of the 'nets problems. It would solve a few problems, but the more 'diverse' the computer software on the 'net becomes, the more interoperability problems will rear their ugly heads. If there are 600 different types of machines all with their own quirks, warts, and 'extended functionality' features vying for customers to use them, new and potentially worse problems will surface.
Just be more realistic. The 'diversity' metaphor, which borrows on the fact of 'bio-diversity' only has a certain amount of merit. Diversity won't cure all problems, and in fact new problems will surface if and when it becomes the state of affairs.
No. The 'plausible deniability' inherent in Rubberhose means that they can't know wether you have two or twelve or fifty different items of infomation stored in an area of the drive. So you can give them the key for areas X and Y on the drive, but there aren't discrete boundraies for valid data (as opposed to the noise data) on the drive that they know as areas A, B, and C. So you can deny those areas exist, claiming you gave them the only key. There's no way for them to know that you've given them every key.
It sounds like what you're saying is that because you've remapped your keyboard to Dvorak, you're so pitifully slow at hunt-and-peck typing that a scrambled keyboard wouldn't really make you type any slower than you already do.
Probably not what you meant.
However, having the ability to look at the URL provided in a piece of spam, look up the WHOIS data listed, and file a complaint and/or start a campaign against that business/individual...
There's good reason for us to start using the WHOIS data to punish spammers and/or the interests they spam on the behalf of.
Being able to do this just requires one mechanism which is already in place: validation of the contact info, and enforcement of it's accuracy.
Why is this any more 'extreme' than most of the other anti-spam measures people advocate?
Strictly enforcing accuracy the WHOIS database and educating victims of spam about it could serve as an excellent means of fighting back at spam.
Keep anybody who has a website accountable, and the net will be a better place.
Why is it a big deal, any more than it's a big deal to have your name, address, and phone number listed in a telphone directory?
And if you're unlisted in the telephone directory, why are you being so frickin' paranoid?
Publicly available directories with that info have been available for generations. It's not info that's particularly 'compromising' to make available.
Yeah, yeah. I am sure there are plenty of 'noids out there who will explain why I am sooo wrong.
Why can't good musicians do their own distribution (via mp3.com or otherwise)?
Beats me? Maybe there just aren't that many good musicians out there.
Just because it CAN be done is a cool enough reason to do it for some of us.
I run NetBSD and X11 on a Macintosh SE/30. With it's tiny little black and white screen. It's so cramped that I have to run the Tab Window Manager (TWM) because FVWM has too much 'eye candy' and crowds the windows.
I could go to an auction here and get a Pentium 100 box for one buck (sometimes that price for a whole pallet of Pentium 100s) if I wanted to just run a freenix on cheap hardware (a Mac SE/30 isn't even particularly cheap, with all the motherfuckers who are stripping the hardware out to make fricking aquariums out of the cases).
The PCJr. will be a particular challange. Not only doesn't it have memory protection, it doesn't even have a DMA controller.
Every disk fetch and all I/O on a PCJr. has to pass through the CPU's registers. There are special kludges and BIOS 'features' in the junior that make it capable of even running DOS.
It makes for a glacially slow machine. I used to be fond of running 3-Demon on my PCJr. The machine was so slow that if you turned to face down a long hall of the 3-D wire-framed game, the rendering of the wireframe would significantly bog down the game.
I guess I'm weird that way, that I consider that 'cool.'
I am lazy about futzing around with Slip, and always throw an ancient ethernet card into a similarly ancient machine that I want to install a freenix on, and install from an NFS server.
That was an early winning point for NetBSD, in fact. It has/had(?) FAR better integration of PCMCIA into the base kernal, so it was trivial to install NetBSD on any old laptop, so long as it had PCMCIA. Linux at the time had it's PCMCIA support as a pasted-on kludge, which made it a horrible hack to install Slackware.
Who cares about 'the linux GUI experience' in the first place??
My Window Manager of Choice is still eXceed on Windows 2000. Putty is pretty damn good terminal interface for non-gui tasks. And I do a LOT of things on the Linux and NetBSD boxes on my network.
A computer without RS-232C serial ports is a computer that has been crippled by edict from Redmond.
I was about to comment that this seemed like a pretty redundant 'news' topic, as there has been Microchannel support in Linux for a few years now. But maybe this has to do with the Model 30 or something?
NONE of the things Bush has done or proposed are the things you do to get a country out of a slump.
Translation: NONE of the things Bush has done are what a bunch of Academic political scientists who are big-government advocates feel should be done.
Whoo! You're going to picket? Which store, at which mall? For what period of time?
Make sure you give plenty of notice ahead of time, or nobody will notice.