That's why I'm voting for Kerry. His party is much less effective at passing legislation restricting citizens rights than is the Republican Party
Virtually all federal gun control laws were signed by Democratic presidents and sent to them by a Democratic controlled congress. By that standard, I would argue that the Democrats are just as effective at restricting civil liberties (albiet different ones) as the Republicans are.
Katie, Katie who can I turn to
We want you to give us something you want to hold on to
I know you think we're like the others before - Who saw your info in the WHOIS database + Who choose who's 'WHOIS' they got to ignore
It wasn't that I couldn't come up with a rhyme, but rather that those particular two lines in the original song don't rhyme. When I bastardize something, I try to be as faithful to the original as possible.:)
I know you'll think I'm like the others before Who saw your name and number on the wall
Katie, Katie who can I turn to We want you to give us something you want to hold on to I know you think we're like the others before Who saw your info in the WHOIS database
Kaaatie, I got your domain! I'm gonna make it mine! Kaatie please change your domain! K-A-T-I-E-dot-COMiomiom K-A-T-I-E-dot-CO Mioniom
Katie, Katie it's the site for me Donate your domain, it'll make me so happy Our lawyers called you before Yeah they've got some nerve We aren't sorry that Your life was disturbed
Kaaatie, I got your domain! I'm gonna make it mine! Kaatie please change your domain! K-A-T-I-E-dot-COMiomiom K-A-T-I-E-dot-CO Mioniom
Soldiers always say that, not realizing that most people don't want them to die, especially not for the cause their government has chosen.
I'm not a soldier, though I have quite a few friends who are or were. I also did not suggest that people WANTED soldiers to die, nor that all wars had the support of the populace.
But in regards to the grandparent's assertation (that armies were a useless waste of money) I would note that when an unfriendly power knocks on the door, the only thing standing between freedom and being conquered is that useless waste of money. At that point, the screaming begins about how $POLITICAL_PARTY wasn't spending enough on the army.
Of all the countries that were involved in WWII action, Helsinki and London are the only capitals that were not invaded by foreign troups at any stage of the war
The reality is that the so-called political spectrum is more of a sphere than a line. The extreme right and far left meet and become one and the same.
This is extremely well said, and bears repeating. Extremists are always the ones most willing--even eager--to use violence to achieve their ends, no matter what those ends may be--and just because they're nominally "on your side" doesn't mean they merit support. Be it a nut blowing up an abortion clinic (I'm pro-life, and I still think they're nuts) or a tree hugger torching a McDonald's, they seem to invariably do more harm to the cause they nominally support than help.
Unless my math is wrong, they're paying about $500/user. $125/year. But since most companies will not upgrade the OS or applications more often than every 4 years, they basically are paying $500 to Microsoft for each user. That's a ton of money-- maybe it's all worth it, but I guess this is what people are talking about when they mention the "Microsoft Tax."
Given that it's Australian dollars, and that it likely includes all the goodies (Exchange, SQL Server, etc) along with actual support, I'd say this is a hell of a good deal.
Has anyone else heard about this movie possibly being directed by Darren Aronofski? (Requiem for a dream, Pi) I've heard this from other people, and was just curious to see if anyone else had heard anything similar
Hey, here's a novel IT solution: BACKUP YOUR DATA! Ever hear of fault tolerant disk subsystems? Sheesh!
Your RAID array isn't going to help you if the access database (really!) the votes are kept in eats itself.
I really don't see why the touchscreen systems everybody is pushing don't come equiped with a printer. You enter your votes, the machine prints out a properly filled out and formatted ballot for you from the choices you made. If everything is correct, the machine tallys your vote and you drop the ballot in a ballot box. If not, you give the spoiled ballot to an election worker, and start the process over till you get it right. In the end you get the promised benefits of computer voting (instant counting, ease of use) along with a hard, easily verified record in the case of irregularities.
The fact that companies like Diebold are DEAD SET against seeing something like this says that they have a vested interest in machines that just don't count the ballots correctly. Our elected representatives constantly trying to smooth things over instead of fixing the problem just makes things worse.
I can only conclude (as many others have before me) that the planned outcome of all this is rigged elections. That being the case, start trying Diebold execs and the people who buy and implement their crooked machines for treason. Anyone who tries to meddle in our elections deserves the rope.
Why is there no verification or personal audit trail available for elections?
Picture your boss telling you you'll be fired if you don't vote for GWB. Picture some thug telling you he'll break your kneecaps if you don't vote for John Kerry. Picture someone else offering you $50 if you vote for Ralph Nader.
With a secret ballot you can always lie and tell whoever is pressuring you that you did their bidding. With an audit trail, that same pressure can be brought against you to prove you're telling the truth. And that's NOT a good thing.
Incidentally, my dad just killed his Dell with a glass of wine. They wouldn't uphold thier support contract, so he got a sweet Toshiba P20 widescreen laptop
When he purchased the laptop, your dad had the option to purchase the support contract that covers user-inflicted damage (They call it "CompleteCare") and obviously didn't do so.
Don't bitch at Dell because he decided the $100 or so wasn't worth it.
BTW, I'm a Dell customer who IS satisfied with their support--at least on Optiplexes, Latitudes, and Poweredges. You buy their business class systems, you get business class support from people in Texas, Tennessee, and Georgia. Buy their consumer grade systems, you get the lowest bidding Indian call center.
It says this is to "protect the confidential and proprietary nature of the information" and to "avoid fostering speculation regardng its SCOsource business"
The thing that really gets me about that one is that the two million or so shares Baystar is due represents about 1/6th of SCO's outstanding shares. So SCO is basically saying it needs to keep "proprietary data" secret from the people who own over 15% of their company. How the hell does THAT make any kind of sense?
So we've got about 24.6m shares. Profit per share is in the $11-15 range. The price per share is about $108-135. This puts the P/E ratio at about 7-12, which is extremely low. P/E Ratios are usually in the teens, and for.com IPOs have been in the 20+ range.
You're missing that the 24.6 million shares really only represent about 10% of google. Which means your math is off by an order of magnitude--instead of a P/E ratio of 7-12, you're looking at 70-120 which is not a good deal.
I completely disagree with you on that one. Many people use drugs as a form of experimentation or for spiritual purposes. Classifying all drug users as the same thing is just ignorant.
I think the original poster agrees with you. You'll note he said "drug abuse." There's a world of difference between what you describe (i.e. someone who smokes a joint on friday night to relax after a long work week, or an American Indian who uses peyote for ceremony) and abuse--which I would describe as "losing your job, house, family, and selling your body for your next fix."
Speech? ask the people banned to the "First Amendment Areas" that are out of sight and the people who were arrested for wearing the wrong T-Shirts at a Bush rally.
What's interesting is this is not the first time there's been a *big* experiment. In the '40s, when we were fighting another crazy ideology or two (fascism, national shintoism), some nut thought that we could train our soldiers to consume less than the required amount of water--especially for desert operations. The idea there was to reduce the burden to the military's logisitical infrastructure by having the soldier consume less water. What's disappointing is this: the human body requires a minimum amount of water to operate
This isn't as crazy as you would think: navies (who are surrounded by water but can only drink the water already on the ship) did this (successfully) for centuries. Half rations or even quarter rations were horrible for morale and the health of the men, but it kept everyone from dying of thirst weeks before land was sighted.
To do this, experts from the company that makes the newspaper's core Windows-based publishing software, Denmark-based CCI Europe A/S, needed to install upgrades of its Newsdesk brand software that the Tribune and other clients use.
So was it Sun or Microsoft?? Or maybe Apple?
How about none of the above? CCI Europe A/S seems to take the blame here, or at least that's how I read it.
So don't ask them to vote for it and just unleash it upon them. Develop systems for anonymous whistleblowing, anonymous information sharing, anonymous publishing. Repurpose mainstream technologies for surveillance, use the same toys They have (or their cheaper off-the-shelf versions) against themselves. They may control the Laws, but we control the Technology.
I support the above wholeheartedly. These days, however, anybody actually attempting to carry out your suggestion is likely going to end up a guest at Club Fed--or worse yet, Gitmo. In a land without privacy, there's no such thing as anonymous. Your whistleblower is going to be in a world of hurt.
I think we're nearing the end of our republic, and that both saddens and terrifies me.
How is this any different than an auction on eBay? Plenty of auctions there have reserves to ensure a reasonable bid is made. If not, then just put tags on it out on the street and have a yard sale.
Hey, I'm not decrying the practice--it seems some sucker always comes along and pays way more than something is worth. Given that the job of the auctioneer is to recoup as much as possible for the creditors, I'd say that's a good thing.
My comment was mostly directed at anyone planning to bid, not the sellers.
Privacy's gone. Abandon the flank and start insisting on reciprocal surveillance. You have no other choice.
I'm dead serious.
I realize you're serious, but what you suggest is unworkable. Our "civil servants" (who usually seem neither servile, nor particularly civil) will inevitably trot out the "national security" bogeyman should anyone try publically track THEIR actions the way the actions of the average citizen are currently tracked privately.
Additionally, you're left with the paradox that the people whose privacy you wish to compromise in order to level the playing field are the very people who pass the laws in the first place. Would YOU vote to let anyone and everyone track YOUR movements? I certainly wouldn't!
In short, if you're correct--and privacy really is irrevocably gone--then the fight is lost until such time as something happens to make things change back to some reasonable facsimile of the way they were.
These company auctions rarely offer discount prices on anything... People get caught up in the moment and end up paying crazy prices for hardware. Often times you actually do better by buying newer hardware, then picking up things from these auction
No joke--another thing to consider is that any hardware you pick up is going to be at least three and a half years old (Enron died 12/2000.)
Something I noticed in the listings is that everything seems to have a minimum bid of $200, no matter what it is. Compaq server rack? $200. Compaq server rack with builtin 15" LCD, keyboard, trackball, and KVM? $200.
Like you noted, anyone who finds a good deal is someone willing to buy by the pallet at fifty to seventy cents on the dollar. If you're a surplus dealer who can move that kind of volume, more power to you. Else, best advice is stay away.
Sanctions, legally, only restrict trade, not travel, so the issue devolves to how much money Fisher left behind or took out of Yugoslavia
Another poster already provided citations elsewhere in this thread, but after winning, Fischer left with almost four million dollars. The US Treasury also argued that his presence was a significant economic boon to Yugoslavia.
In short, the answer is "alot" and he seems to be pretty screwed to the tune of something like a quarter million in fines, and having to forfeit all of his winnings. Not to mention the possible jail time.
While I don't think the US government should be telling its citizens that it can't engage in economic actibity with foreign countries we are not at war with, I can see how the power to regular foreign commerce gives the government the right to do just that. What's worse for Fischer is that he isn't exactly a sympathetic figure--I'd be amazed if there is a Jury in this country that could be impartial in regard to him.
Frankly i think its all pretty bogus. Ok Yugoslavia was under sanctions. Big deal. He went there to play chess. I think this entire mess shows an inflated sense of self importance for the US gov, or at least hypocracy. The UN matters when they agree with US and doesn't matter when they don't?
Ignoring the larger issue of whether or not violating sanctions should come with crminal penalties, it should be noted that Yugoslavia was under US sanctions at the time in addition to UN sanctions. That being the case, this isn't an instance of "the UN matters when they agree with us, and doesn't when our opinions differ" though I certainly agree that the current US administration holds that view in general.
Re:Interesting that the Japanese authorities are
on
Bobby Fischer Found
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
I actually don't think they should extradite either of them, but if you are going to do it, at least be consistent...
Fischer isn't being extradited, he's being deported because his passport isn't valid. There's an important distinction there.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why I'm voting for Kerry. His party is much less effective at passing legislation restricting citizens rights than is the Republican Party
Virtually all federal gun control laws were signed by Democratic presidents and sent to them by a Democratic controlled congress. By that standard, I would argue that the Democrats are just as effective at restricting civil liberties (albiet different ones) as the Republicans are.
Please apply this patch to the above:
:)
Katie, Katie who can I turn to
We want you to give us something you want to hold on to
I know you think we're like the others before
- Who saw your info in the WHOIS database
+ Who choose who's 'WHOIS' they got to ignore
It wasn't that I couldn't come up with a rhyme, but rather that those particular two lines in the original song don't rhyme. When I bastardize something, I try to be as faithful to the original as possible.
I know you'll think I'm like the others before
Who saw your name and number on the wall
With appologies to Tommy Tutone:
O Mioniom
O Mioniom
m
Katie, Katie who can I turn to
We want you to give us something you want to hold on to
I know you think we're like the others before
Who saw your info in the WHOIS database
Kaaatie, I got your domain!
I'm gonna make it mine!
Kaatie please change your domain!
K-A-T-I-E-dot-COMiomiom
K-A-T-I-E-dot-C
Katie, Katie it's the site for me
Donate your domain, it'll make me so happy
Our lawyers called you before
Yeah they've got some nerve
We aren't sorry that
Your life was disturbed
Kaaatie, I got your domain!
I'm gonna make it mine!
Kaatie please change your domain!
K-A-T-I-E-dot-COMiomiom
K-A-T-I-E-dot-C
K-A-T-I-E-dot-COMiomiom
K-A-T-I-E-dot-COMionio
Soldiers always say that, not realizing that most people don't want them to die, especially not for the cause their government has chosen.
I'm not a soldier, though I have quite a few friends who are or were. I also did not suggest that people WANTED soldiers to die, nor that all wars had the support of the populace.
But in regards to the grandparent's assertation (that armies were a useless waste of money) I would note that when an unfriendly power knocks on the door, the only thing standing between freedom and being conquered is that useless waste of money. At that point, the screaming begins about how $POLITICAL_PARTY wasn't spending enough on the army.
I stand by my assertation.
Of all the countries that were involved in WWII action, Helsinki and London are the only capitals that were not invaded by foreign troups at any stage of the war
You missed Canberra and Washington, D.C.
the army, IMO, it's one of the most useless money-sucking institutions ever invented.
Everybody says that until they need soldiers to die for them.
The reality is that the so-called political spectrum is more of a sphere than a line. The extreme right and far left meet and become one and the same.
This is extremely well said, and bears repeating. Extremists are always the ones most willing--even eager--to use violence to achieve their ends, no matter what those ends may be--and just because they're nominally "on your side" doesn't mean they merit support. Be it a nut blowing up an abortion clinic (I'm pro-life, and I still think they're nuts) or a tree hugger torching a McDonald's, they seem to invariably do more harm to the cause they nominally support than help.
Unless my math is wrong, they're paying about $500/user. $125/year. But since most companies will not upgrade the OS or applications more often than every 4 years, they basically are paying $500 to Microsoft for each user. That's a ton of money-- maybe it's all worth it, but I guess this is what people are talking about when they mention the "Microsoft Tax."
Given that it's Australian dollars, and that it likely includes all the goodies (Exchange, SQL Server, etc) along with actual support, I'd say this is a hell of a good deal.
Has anyone else heard about this movie possibly being directed by Darren Aronofski? (Requiem for a dream, Pi) I've heard this from other people, and was just curious to see if anyone else had heard anything similar
Now THIS sounds like a topic for Ask Slashdot--the new source for people too lazy to use google. Or you could try imdb, and see it's Christopher Nolan.
Hey, here's a novel IT solution: BACKUP YOUR DATA! Ever hear of fault tolerant disk subsystems? Sheesh!
Your RAID array isn't going to help you if the access database (really!) the votes are kept in eats itself.
I really don't see why the touchscreen systems everybody is pushing don't come equiped with a printer. You enter your votes, the machine prints out a properly filled out and formatted ballot for you from the choices you made. If everything is correct, the machine tallys your vote and you drop the ballot in a ballot box. If not, you give the spoiled ballot to an election worker, and start the process over till you get it right. In the end you get the promised benefits of computer voting (instant counting, ease of use) along with a hard, easily verified record in the case of irregularities.
The fact that companies like Diebold are DEAD SET against seeing something like this says that they have a vested interest in machines that just don't count the ballots correctly. Our elected representatives constantly trying to smooth things over instead of fixing the problem just makes things worse.
I can only conclude (as many others have before me) that the planned outcome of all this is rigged elections. That being the case, start trying Diebold execs and the people who buy and implement their crooked machines for treason. Anyone who tries to meddle in our elections deserves the rope.
Why is there no verification or personal audit trail available for elections?
Picture your boss telling you you'll be fired if you don't vote for GWB. Picture some thug telling you he'll break your kneecaps if you don't vote for John Kerry. Picture someone else offering you $50 if you vote for Ralph Nader.
With a secret ballot you can always lie and tell whoever is pressuring you that you did their bidding. With an audit trail, that same pressure can be brought against you to prove you're telling the truth. And that's NOT a good thing.
Incidentally, my dad just killed his Dell with a glass of wine. They wouldn't uphold thier support contract, so he got a sweet Toshiba P20 widescreen laptop
When he purchased the laptop, your dad had the option to purchase the support contract that covers user-inflicted damage (They call it "CompleteCare") and obviously didn't do so.
Don't bitch at Dell because he decided the $100 or so wasn't worth it.
BTW, I'm a Dell customer who IS satisfied with their support--at least on Optiplexes, Latitudes, and Poweredges. You buy their business class systems, you get business class support from people in Texas, Tennessee, and Georgia. Buy their consumer grade systems, you get the lowest bidding Indian call center.
It says this is to "protect the confidential and proprietary nature of the information" and to "avoid fostering speculation regardng its SCOsource business"
The thing that really gets me about that one is that the two million or so shares Baystar is due represents about 1/6th of SCO's outstanding shares. So SCO is basically saying it needs to keep "proprietary data" secret from the people who own over 15% of their company. How the hell does THAT make any kind of sense?
So we've got about 24.6m shares. Profit per share is in the $11-15 range. The price per share is about $108-135. This puts the P/E ratio at about 7-12, which is extremely low. P/E Ratios are usually in the teens, and for .com IPOs have been in the 20+ range.
You're missing that the 24.6 million shares really only represent about 10% of google. Which means your math is off by an order of magnitude--instead of a P/E ratio of 7-12, you're looking at 70-120 which is not a good deal.
I completely disagree with you on that one. Many people use drugs as a form of experimentation or for spiritual purposes. Classifying all drug users as the same thing is just ignorant.
I think the original poster agrees with you. You'll note he said "drug abuse." There's a world of difference between what you describe (i.e. someone who smokes a joint on friday night to relax after a long work week, or an American Indian who uses peyote for ceremony) and abuse--which I would describe as "losing your job, house, family, and selling your body for your next fix."
Speech? ask the people banned to the "First Amendment Areas" that are out of sight and the people who were arrested for wearing the wrong T-Shirts at a Bush rally.
It's not just Republicans, though--democrats are into first amendment zones, too.
The real threat to America isn't John Ashcroft--he's just a symptom of a larger disease.
What's interesting is this is not the first time there's been a *big* experiment. In the '40s, when we were fighting another crazy ideology or two (fascism, national shintoism), some nut thought that we could train our soldiers to consume less than the required amount of water--especially for desert operations. The idea there was to reduce the burden to the military's logisitical infrastructure by having the soldier consume less water. What's disappointing is this: the human body requires a minimum amount of water to operate
This isn't as crazy as you would think: navies (who are surrounded by water but can only drink the water already on the ship) did this (successfully) for centuries. Half rations or even quarter rations were horrible for morale and the health of the men, but it kept everyone from dying of thirst weeks before land was sighted.
To do this, experts from the company that makes the newspaper's core Windows-based publishing software, Denmark-based CCI Europe A/S, needed to install upgrades of its Newsdesk brand software that the Tribune and other clients use.
So was it Sun or Microsoft?? Or maybe Apple?
How about none of the above? CCI Europe A/S seems to take the blame here, or at least that's how I read it.
So don't ask them to vote for it and just unleash it upon them. Develop systems for anonymous whistleblowing, anonymous information sharing, anonymous publishing. Repurpose mainstream technologies for surveillance, use the same toys They have (or their cheaper off-the-shelf versions) against themselves. They may control the Laws, but we control the Technology.
I support the above wholeheartedly. These days, however, anybody actually attempting to carry out your suggestion is likely going to end up a guest at Club Fed--or worse yet, Gitmo. In a land without privacy, there's no such thing as anonymous. Your whistleblower is going to be in a world of hurt.
I think we're nearing the end of our republic, and that both saddens and terrifies me.
How is this any different than an auction on eBay? Plenty of auctions there have reserves to ensure a reasonable bid is made. If not, then just put tags on it out on the street and have a yard sale.
Hey, I'm not decrying the practice--it seems some sucker always comes along and pays way more than something is worth. Given that the job of the auctioneer is to recoup as much as possible for the creditors, I'd say that's a good thing.
My comment was mostly directed at anyone planning to bid, not the sellers.
Privacy's gone. Abandon the flank and start insisting on reciprocal surveillance. You have no other choice.
I'm dead serious.
I realize you're serious, but what you suggest is unworkable. Our "civil servants" (who usually seem neither servile, nor particularly civil) will inevitably trot out the "national security" bogeyman should anyone try publically track THEIR actions the way the actions of the average citizen are currently tracked privately.
Additionally, you're left with the paradox that the people whose privacy you wish to compromise in order to level the playing field are the very people who pass the laws in the first place. Would YOU vote to let anyone and everyone track YOUR movements? I certainly wouldn't!
In short, if you're correct--and privacy really is irrevocably gone--then the fight is lost until such time as something happens to make things change back to some reasonable facsimile of the way they were.
These company auctions rarely offer discount prices on anything... People get caught up in the moment and end up paying crazy prices for hardware. Often times you actually do better by buying newer hardware, then picking up things from these auction
No joke--another thing to consider is that any hardware you pick up is going to be at least three and a half years old (Enron died 12/2000.)
Something I noticed in the listings is that everything seems to have a minimum bid of $200, no matter what it is. Compaq server rack? $200. Compaq server rack with builtin 15" LCD, keyboard, trackball, and KVM? $200.
Like you noted, anyone who finds a good deal is someone willing to buy by the pallet at fifty to seventy cents on the dollar. If you're a surplus dealer who can move that kind of volume, more power to you. Else, best advice is stay away.
Sanctions, legally, only restrict trade, not travel, so the issue devolves to how much money Fisher left behind or took out of Yugoslavia
Another poster already provided citations elsewhere in this thread, but after winning, Fischer left with almost four million dollars. The US Treasury also argued that his presence was a significant economic boon to Yugoslavia.
In short, the answer is "alot" and he seems to be pretty screwed to the tune of something like a quarter million in fines, and having to forfeit all of his winnings. Not to mention the possible jail time.
While I don't think the US government should be telling its citizens that it can't engage in economic actibity with foreign countries we are not at war with, I can see how the power to regular foreign commerce gives the government the right to do just that. What's worse for Fischer is that he isn't exactly a sympathetic figure--I'd be amazed if there is a Jury in this country that could be impartial in regard to him.
Frankly i think its all pretty bogus. Ok Yugoslavia was under sanctions. Big deal. He went there to play chess. I think this entire mess shows an inflated sense of self importance for the US gov, or at least hypocracy. The UN matters when they agree with US and doesn't matter when they don't?
Ignoring the larger issue of whether or not violating sanctions should come with crminal penalties, it should be noted that Yugoslavia was under US sanctions at the time in addition to UN sanctions. That being the case, this isn't an instance of "the UN matters when they agree with us, and doesn't when our opinions differ" though I certainly agree that the current US administration holds that view in general.
I actually don't think they should extradite either of them, but if you are going to do it, at least be consistent...
Fischer isn't being extradited, he's being deported because his passport isn't valid. There's an important distinction there.