>> I'd imagine that most of them really didn't want that stuff leaked...Because most normal people tend to put naked pictures of themselves in a cloud somewhere?
>> or they'd just leak them, themselves, in a coordinated manner.
That was exactly my point, that this is actually coordinated.
What those celebs are actually thinking is that there's no such thing as bad publicity, especially when backed up with fake self-righteous indignation.
I think its funny that most people still genuinely believe that those celebs really didn't want that stuff leaked.
>> but yeah. Keep on keeping on. It is all fun and games until it is your own daughter or son caught up in that shit.
Acutally my girlfrineds daughter is a Heroin addict so I think I have some perspective here. I know exactly whats going on and I already see the benefits of it being illegal.
>> "But, but if they did not DO the drugs in the first place, it would not be a problem."
Tada.
>> Carry on with your naivete kind sir. Carry on.
You're just like every other drug user. You all staunchly defend your use of drugs with very colorful and great-sounding arguments that are nonetheless bassd entirely on bollocks.
The bottom line is that drug abuse causes a LOT of problems to individuals and society, far more than any actual benefit. Thats why its illegal.
Why don't we both just carry on the way we are. You keep buying illegal substances from random sources and then putting it straight into your body and I won't. Then lets see which of us lives longer/healthier/better lives.
>> And if people drink too much then others can get hurt, and if people smoke too much then people can get hurt, and if people go down to the track and go auto racing then people can get hurt, and if people go skiing then people can get hurt, etc, etc, etc.
With the possible exception of very excessive drinking (which is basically just another form of drug abuse), none of those things cause the sort of damage to a family that having a hard drug user in your family does. Trust me on this, I've experienced it first hand.
The fact that drinking is already legal yet alcoholism is still a large problem in society should already show you that the legalisation of a drug isn't a magic bullet to make all the societal problems associated with it suddenly go away.
You do realise that Rohypnol is made by drug companies, is widely used pre-surgery and helps millions of people that suffer with convulsions and insomnia right?
What about those complete fucks that make rope? do you know how many people get tied up against their will or even strangled to death by rope?
I have interviewed many new grads, and its clear to me that what the American universities are now turning out is a bunch of hyper-specialized grads that only know literally one subject. Because their education is so narrowly focussed they are at least equal to those from non-US universities in that narrow area, but not even slightly as well-rounded otherwise.
I prefer the idea that my university in the UK had, They made a point of explicitly NOT training you for employment, but for a better life. They taught you how to think, not how to memorize 3 key text books and a bunch of jargon.
So what my Uni at least produced was much more rounded people that are much more prepared and continuously adaptable to new challenges even outside their chosen field.
I suppose my question really is: Is getting into some interview room really now the ONLY goal to spending 3 or 4 years or more at university at least in the US? If so that's very sad.
>> The drug machine is caused by government prohibition.
Agreed.
>> No innocent people would be hurt if the government stayed out of these personal decisions.
Strongly disagreed. I think you're assuming that people live as islands. Others (family, friends etc) actually do get hurt and face real burdens when people they already care about get hooked on hard drugs.
I for one don't want to live in a society where drugs/drug users are even more pervasive than they already are. I'm not at all sure that legalizing all drugs would be the end to the societal drug problems as most drug users conveniently claim it would be.
Its not circular reasoning at all. I am not disagreeing that if the law was different then my point would be different. I also agree that it is not appropriate for the government to be legislating "morality". i.e. We should not be persecuted for doing WTF we want with our own bodies, as long as it doesnt hurt anyone else.
However given that US drug law and therefore situation apparently aren't about to change anytime soon, I stand by what I said: Buying drugs IS keeping an evil drug machine going that DOES hurt innocent people.
>> truly-victimless crime (personally using drugs without any intent to distribute, for example),
Thats a very naive viewpoint. Just by buying the drugs you're funding the entire drug machine so keeping it rolling, including the bits that hurt innocent people.
You're right I don't think Iran is a real threat, but I think that if ISIS/ISIL/IS ever somehow got their hands on a nuke, or even just some enriched uranium they would soon try to use it on the west at least as a dirty bomb....and meanwhile Putin is trying to move Russia back to the Cold War era politics too.
Consequently IMHO its probably good to keep a deterrent around at least for now, not that the UK ones represent much on a global scale.
>> Well, that must then mean that schools abroad are better than schools in the US
I am a Brit now living in the US, and have a young son. Honestly my own (fairly average) school education in England makes that provided to him by public schools in the US look _very_ poor and low quality by comparison.
I'm sure you made your comment with some degree of self-evident sarcasm intended, but based on what I have seen first-hand I'd be very surprised if there actually isn't a lot of truth in it, especially in comparison to many EU countries.
>> In particular, the algorithm points out that Norman Rockwell's Shuffleton's Barber Shop painted in 1950 is remarkably similar to Frederic Bazille's Studio 9 Rue de la Condamine painted 80 years before.
Not at all. Apart from both being of (different sized) rooms painted from an approximately similar angle, there really is nothing else that is the same about the two paintings. It would appear that the computer is keying only off of very large features such as a general observation that a large lightsource of a simliar size and location is in both (but in one painting its half a window which is really a secondary subject, and in the other, a doorway to a room with a light in that is the primary subject). If the computer can only make decisions based on such broad generalisations, it really is pretty much useless.
That idea won't be effective at all. All that this will do is become another forum for sanitized mediocre groupthink.
The problem is that on most public websites, someone genuinely posting a polite, well-reasoned yet strongly contrary viewpoint will often still get marked as flamebait or trolling just because there are apparently a surprisingly high percentage of closed-minded people that just can't abide even the existence of any viewpoint that is much different from theirs, or the social norm.
You don't even need to leave this site to find plenty of great examples of that effect in action.
If you give those people even more power, they would just delete everything that doesn't fit their wold view, so the only thing left on the website would quickly become just all the uncontroversial politically correct unintelligent mush.
a finger ring (or better yet an implant) with a unique RFID chip in it. If the chip is not in close proximity to the computer keyboard, the compuiter immediately lockscreens.
An API to read the unique code of the user's chip would be avaiable to online apps too, so websites can use the same system to authenticate.
For extra security, the ring/implant could also continuously detect the wearer's presence and life, possibly with biometrics as simple as confirming the users pulse. If the signal is disrupted the implant can assume it is no longer secure until its reauthenticated.
So does Microsoft. Look at their history, they on purpose ignore any existing standards and make their own incompatible versions of everything (that in most cases are also significantly functionally worse). They are doing that exactly to be able to create and control a walled garden. But you really can't blame Microsoft (or Apple) for finding ways to continue to rip people off as long as there are maroons that will continue to buy their products.
The ones to blame are the persistent Microsoft customers (I'm looking at you, IT depeartment heads) that prefer to keep cluelessly paying through the nose for shit products, even though there is nearly always a more functional, more useful, easier to use, more standard, more open and often even free alternative.
>> or when people just don't see the value in buying one.
In all cases where people don't spend their money the way the government wants, legislation gets very quickly enacted to make sure that all the stuff that people would actually prefer to buy becomes either taxed to death or just outright illegal. Groups like MADD are probably already planning and fundraising to push such legislation through with as much money as it takes.
Of course the gov. will find a way to claim its all about saving lives or any other excuse to avoid admitting its actually all about making more money/votes from special interest groups at the cost of all of our freedoms of choice.
Once the self-driving legislation is in place, they will then quickly focus on making it illegal for humans to drive at all, and also illegal for all new cars to even have controls that make it possible to manually drive them.
Slashdot Mirror
>> I'd imagine that most of them really didn't want that stuff leaked ...Because most normal people tend to put naked pictures of themselves in a cloud somewhere?
>> or they'd just leak them, themselves, in a coordinated manner.
That was exactly my point, that this is actually coordinated.
What those celebs are actually thinking is that there's no such thing as bad publicity, especially when backed up with fake self-righteous indignation.
I think its funny that most people still genuinely believe that those celebs really didn't want that stuff leaked.
>> but yeah. Keep on keeping on. It is all fun and games until it is your own daughter or son caught up in that shit.
Acutally my girlfrineds daughter is a Heroin addict so I think I have some perspective here. I know exactly whats going on and I already see the benefits of it being illegal.
>> "But, but if they did not DO the drugs in the first place, it would not be a problem."
Tada.
>> Carry on with your naivete kind sir. Carry on.
You're just like every other drug user. You all staunchly defend your use of drugs with very colorful and great-sounding arguments that are nonetheless bassd entirely on bollocks.
The bottom line is that drug abuse causes a LOT of problems to individuals and society, far more than any actual benefit. Thats why its illegal.
Why don't we both just carry on the way we are. You keep buying illegal substances from random sources and then putting it straight into your body and I won't. Then lets see which of us lives longer/healthier/better lives.
>> And if people drink too much then others can get hurt, and if people smoke too much then people can get hurt, and if people go down to the track and go auto racing then people can get hurt, and if people go skiing then people can get hurt, etc, etc, etc.
With the possible exception of very excessive drinking (which is basically just another form of drug abuse), none of those things cause the sort of damage to a family that having a hard drug user in your family does. Trust me on this, I've experienced it first hand.
The fact that drinking is already legal yet alcoholism is still a large problem in society should already show you that the legalisation of a drug isn't a magic bullet to make all the societal problems associated with it suddenly go away.
>> they mostly seem to concern compatibility with OpenOffice.org
This a problem of their own making, as a direct result of doing an incomplete rollout.
Why are they even continuing to use or even allow Microsoft-proprietary formats in the first place?
The could easily require that anyone submitting documents to them use ODF (or basically any open standard other than Microsoft).
>> How about the complete fucks who make Rohypnol
You do realise that Rohypnol is made by drug companies, is widely used pre-surgery and helps millions of people that suffer with convulsions and insomnia right?
What about those complete fucks that make rope? do you know how many people get tied up against their will or even strangled to death by rope?
I have interviewed many new grads, and its clear to me that what the American universities are now turning out is a bunch of hyper-specialized grads that only know literally one subject. Because their education is so narrowly focussed they are at least equal to those from non-US universities in that narrow area, but not even slightly as well-rounded otherwise.
I prefer the idea that my university in the UK had, They made a point of explicitly NOT training you for employment, but for a better life. They taught you how to think, not how to memorize 3 key text books and a bunch of jargon.
So what my Uni at least produced was much more rounded people that are much more prepared and continuously adaptable to new challenges even outside their chosen field.
I suppose my question really is: Is getting into some interview room really now the ONLY goal to spending 3 or 4 years or more at university at least in the US? If so that's very sad.
>> you force the people who want to participate
No one is forcing them to do drugs.
>> The drug machine is caused by government prohibition.
Agreed.
>> No innocent people would be hurt if the government stayed out of these personal decisions.
Strongly disagreed. I think you're assuming that people live as islands. Others (family, friends etc) actually do get hurt and face real burdens when people they already care about get hooked on hard drugs.
I for one don't want to live in a society where drugs/drug users are even more pervasive than they already are. I'm not at all sure that legalizing all drugs would be the end to the societal drug problems as most drug users conveniently claim it would be.
Its not circular reasoning at all. I am not disagreeing that if the law was different then my point would be different. I also agree that it is not appropriate for the government to be legislating "morality". i.e. We should not be persecuted for doing WTF we want with our own bodies, as long as it doesnt hurt anyone else.
However given that US drug law and therefore situation apparently aren't about to change anytime soon, I stand by what I said:
Buying drugs IS keeping an evil drug machine going that DOES hurt innocent people.
>> truly-victimless crime (personally using drugs without any intent to distribute, for example),
Thats a very naive viewpoint. Just by buying the drugs you're funding the entire drug machine so keeping it rolling, including the bits that hurt innocent people.
You're right I don't think Iran is a real threat, but I think that if ISIS/ISIL/IS ever somehow got their hands on a nuke, or even just some enriched uranium they would soon try to use it on the west at least as a dirty bomb. ...and meanwhile Putin is trying to move Russia back to the Cold War era politics too.
Consequently IMHO its probably good to keep a deterrent around at least for now, not that the UK ones represent much on a global scale.
>> US missiles are PAL-locked;
No, the US went with NTSC.
>> Well, that must then mean that schools abroad are better than schools in the US
I am a Brit now living in the US, and have a young son. Honestly my own (fairly average) school education in England makes that provided to him by public schools in the US look _very_ poor and low quality by comparison.
I'm sure you made your comment with some degree of self-evident sarcasm intended, but based on what I have seen first-hand I'd be very surprised if there actually isn't a lot of truth in it, especially in comparison to many EU countries.
Why did you think adding the "friend" keyword to C++ was a good idea?
Do you still think it is good?
The smallest possible to effectively and elegantly implement its class, and to also remain reable and supportable.
>> In particular, the algorithm points out that Norman Rockwell's Shuffleton's Barber Shop painted in 1950 is remarkably similar to Frederic Bazille's Studio 9 Rue de la Condamine painted 80 years before.
Not at all. Apart from both being of (different sized) rooms painted from an approximately similar angle, there really is nothing else that is the same about the two paintings. It would appear that the computer is keying only off of very large features such as a general observation that a large lightsource of a simliar size and location is in both (but in one painting its half a window which is really a secondary subject, and in the other, a doorway to a room with a light in that is the primary subject). If the computer can only make decisions based on such broad generalisations, it really is pretty much useless.
That idea won't be effective at all. All that this will do is become another forum for sanitized mediocre groupthink.
The problem is that on most public websites, someone genuinely posting a polite, well-reasoned yet strongly contrary viewpoint will often still get marked as flamebait or trolling just because there are apparently a surprisingly high percentage of closed-minded people that just can't abide even the existence of any viewpoint that is much different from theirs, or the social norm.
You don't even need to leave this site to find plenty of great examples of that effect in action.
If you give those people even more power, they would just delete everything that doesn't fit their wold view, so the only thing left on the website would quickly become just all the uncontroversial politically correct unintelligent mush.
a finger ring (or better yet an implant) with a unique RFID chip in it.
If the chip is not in close proximity to the computer keyboard, the compuiter immediately lockscreens.
An API to read the unique code of the user's chip would be avaiable to online apps too, so websites can use the same system to authenticate.
For extra security, the ring/implant could also continuously detect the wearer's presence and life, possibly with biometrics as simple as confirming the users pulse. If the signal is disrupted the implant can assume it is no longer secure until its reauthenticated.
>> Apple wants lockin,
So does Microsoft. Look at their history, they on purpose ignore any existing standards and make their own incompatible versions of everything (that in most cases are also significantly functionally worse). They are doing that exactly to be able to create and control a walled garden. But you really can't blame Microsoft (or Apple) for finding ways to continue to rip people off as long as there are maroons that will continue to buy their products.
The ones to blame are the persistent Microsoft customers (I'm looking at you, IT depeartment heads) that prefer to keep cluelessly paying through the nose for shit products, even though there is nearly always a more functional, more useful, easier to use, more standard, more open and often even free alternative.
>> or when people just don't see the value in buying one.
In all cases where people don't spend their money the way the government wants, legislation gets very quickly enacted to make sure that all the stuff that people would actually prefer to buy becomes either taxed to death or just outright illegal. Groups like MADD are probably already planning and fundraising to push such legislation through with as much money as it takes.
Of course the gov. will find a way to claim its all about saving lives or any other excuse to avoid admitting its actually all about making more money/votes from special interest groups at the cost of all of our freedoms of choice.
Once the self-driving legislation is in place, they will then quickly focus on making it illegal for humans to drive at all, and also illegal for all new cars to even have controls that make it possible to manually drive them.
Emacs is a great operating system, it just needs a good text editor.
everything.
Wow you're not a very good academic if you are seriously trying to suggest a strong correlation between your income and the editor you prefer.