"Is it fossilization of the brain, which isn't physiologically possible at the ancient age of 40 -you're at your peak, really -"
Even at 40, you're probably not at your peak yet, unless you choose to be.
There's been a number of myths about this for way too long. People point to scientists such as Einstein, ignoring the Maxwelloids and Lord Kelvenites who did some of their best work after 40, or occasionally 60. Buckminster Fuller was famous enough to pose at age 40 for a bust commemorating his career in 1929, but practically everything he is now noted for he did after that. The same sort of examples can be cited for art and music (Look at what Bach did after 40). I'm citing mostly historical figures because, if anything modern medicine is making the chance of outstanding performance in later life grater and greater. Meanwhile, some people ignore counter-evidence of rather obvious kinds. (For example, the US Army is generally a young man's game for purely physical reasons, but they grant hundreds of age wavers to keep talented people over age 60 in every year. These are people being kept primarily for their mental skills, and who are also willing to work hard enough at keeping up their physical abilities to not be knocked out for not being able to do 50 push ups on a test before they are even eligible for a waver - obviously that's a lot more selective a pool than in the tech industry, where a diabetic or wheelchair bound person is unlikely to be rejected on those grounds before they even get rejected for age biases).
Actually,/. posters tend to be relatively fluent. Many of them write in complete sentences, spell moderately well, and the cognative dissonance that results from a truly basic communications problem is relatively rare (relative to the average net forum, not necessarily as compared to a graduate classroom in a good university). In fact, I'd say "many Slashdot comments betray", rather than "most".
What I note in discussions such as this one is a need for deeper fluency in logic. If you were to go back through this thread, and note how many posts throw around "all", "every", and other collective phrases that are structured specifically so as to commit the fallacy of the excluded middle, and then extrapolate what this means in the more general case, I suspect you too might move English instruction to second place.
Notice how you, whether by training or concious choice, avoided the hyperbole of saying "all Slashdot comments", or even using phrases such as "the vast majority of". This is just what we need to cultivate.
To several libertarians posting to this thread, you can make a quite rational case that laws to prevent outsourcing to India or even Mexico are unworkable protectionism, and are often racially motivated. Trying to broaden that case, to include the PRC, where many labor sources are literally slave labor, doesn't strengthen your arguement. Rather it sounds like 1984. Slave is the opposite of free, and talking about a "free" market that includes actual slavery in this manner would not be part of your dialog if you were not trying to turn a genuinely extant some into a doctrinal all.
Not so silly - I'm sure you've seen how seriously some people take the black helicopter thing. More likely to look dark is an OD one silouetted against a bright sky. Hey, all military stuff looks black in the dark, except possibly specialist Skippy.
(I'm sorry the web site is down, but there used to be a list of things specialist Schwarz/Skippy wasn't allowed to do in the Army, with a lot of great lines like
"2. My proper military title is 'Specialist Schwarz', not 'Princess Anastasia'."
or
"60. 'The Giant Space Ants' are not at the top of my chain of command."
if anybody can find the whole list, a link would be verra verra nize.)
1. I can see how you parsed it, but if you read closely, I didn't say that Stern had only a 3 million person fan base, I said that (an example) advertiser might be aiming at only 3 million of them.
2. You can call it "made up rantings" if you want. Point is, Stern can turn x amount of profit if his advertisers pay CBS Radio/Infinity, whether his advertisers keep turning a proportionate amount of profit or not. To make it real blunt - His profit is for his company, not his sponsers. A profit for one does not have to be a profit for the other - the two are only loosely indexed. If you have some proof that all advertising is equally well priced and any company can predict an exact guarenteed in advance profit by simply devoting x amount to advertising, why are you posting to slashdot instead of buying 100% control of Clearchannel from your petty cash reserves?
Most marxists were trained by the now defunct KGB. Hitting the president and the joint chiefs is something called a decapitation strategy. Military doctrine is "A nuclear power would only try to take them out because it plans to launch a first strike and hopes to make it impossible for the US chain of command to pass along the codes to retaliate."
Did you ever see Air Force One, that stupid movie where Harrison Ford plays the president of the US and terrorists hijack his plane? Towards the end, a break away former Soviet state, known to have nukes, lauches fighters to persue Air Force 1 and proves it was them behind the plot. In the real world, that would have been seen as the start of a nuclear exchange, and the acting President would have dropped about 2,000 Mtons on any and all suspected launch sites in that break away republic before Harrison Ford could have thrown that last guy off the tail ramp. You don't kill everyone on the other side because you're sure its about to go nuke, you go nuke first because it is likely nobody else with nukes would be stupid enough to try to wack the immediate chain of command for any lesser reason, so you launch because you can't afford to risk waiting to find out for sure.
USSR sponsored terrorists were always expected to do things which would hamper the US, WITHOUT starting WW3. They trained with that limitation, and either knew it or their handlers did.
Al-Quida was lucky people here pretty quickly figured out what was going on. By the time our armed forces had a target, they knew what was happening looked less and less like a decapitation strategy with increasing data, and even worst case intel said whoever was ultimately behind it couldn't have enough nukes to win a war. Al-Quida was also dumb, in that they took a real risk of us not figuring that out quickly, and turning some or all of their supporting states into a sea of glass, maybe along with a lot of other people. Thank God it didn't happen, but there was a real risk.
Why? I don't really know, so what follows is speculative. Words get added to or subtracted from Echelon's lists by people who have the authority, and they don't usually explain why, although sometimes we can guess. Supposedly, both POTUS and FLOTUS were added to a list about the time Janet Reno was, and cross indexed with whatever names the secret service uses for those two. It's a fair bet and common guess for Ehelon watchers that Reno's name has been kept on Echelon's list for some additional time after her retirement, as some of our domestic right wing kooks have decided their issues with her are personal, but why anyone was particularly concerned about someone linking BC's (and now GWB's) secret service nickname with the office is beyond me.
"Son of the Great Satan" is probably the kind of phrase that exists in too many variants to much concern the NSA, so it may not even be on there, but some particular variants might. "Running Dog" sounds Chinese, and is possibly not on the current lists because we're more worried about south west Asia than east Asia right now. Note the possibly and probably - either phrase may in fact be on there. If I knew for certain, would I be allowed to say?
Since this post has doubtless tripped a few filters, I'll just close by saying "Hi Jeff at Langley!".
Holreth's card tabulating systems, originally purchased as "a tool for for census calculations". The little punch hole the Nazis set aside for jew turned out to be very handy - or did you think computing started with ENIAC?
"and really did create a lot of internal passports
didn't have to, as he merely inherited that system."
The increase during the Nazi era in the amount of paperwork required to travel, both within the Reich and abroad, and to engage in economic activities while doing so, is extremely well documented, and is the consensus of most historians today. I'd suggest you ask the Simon Weisenthal Foundation if they have any examples of control paperwork specifically devised during the Naza era and not previously. (Hint: they have over 500 such documents on permanent display in Washington DC. in the holocaust museum, and yes, professional historians already have gone through the collection, categorizing which documents were merly modified forms of older papers with a swastika or eagle overlay and which were completely new paperwork.).
Incidentally, Urban Legend's "debunking' of the claim that various National Socialists supported more gun control has itself been criticized by several organizations. So, I was right about 2 out of 3, willing to split with you on the first point if the NRA's website is considered no more reliable than Urban legends, and you're worried about what hasn't "percolated" down to me? Sometimes the accent on AC really needs to be placed on the 5th and 6th syllables.
Slippery Slope arguements also get developed from historical facts, and may have more validity there. Hitler really did oppose most private gun ownership, really bought big computers (for his time) and put lots of data on people in them, and really did create a lot of internal passports and paperwork to facilitate tracking his own citizens. Those were three steps down a real slippery slope and not just an extrapolated one.
Things that have been steps down a very ugly slope in the past should get special scrutiny when they turn up again. Sometimes it's not just a question of there being lots of data in a census computer, it's a matter of people who promised to use that data only in selected ways having been caught lieing about it. You're quite right in saying putting some already existing information in a computer isn't a significant step down amy slope slippery or non (which seems to be one of your points), but one of the issues here is that some of the statements the government is making seem to contradict others.
If we assume everything that might be a step has strong potential to lead to a horrible totalitarian nightmare, we'll wind up worrying whenever some politician makes a train run on time, or designs a cheap, gas efficent compact family car with a domed roof design, but if we assume no step has much potential, we may let a dozen warning signs go by unnoticed.
Note: If you're moderating this, please read Godwin's law before thinking it applies to all posts that contain the word Hitler.
I agree that a 'Christian' terrorist group is quite possible (If Oklahoma City isn't proof there are already some out there), and that genuine education and social justice are both needed to steer the uncommitted towards non-violent methods, but your last question begs for a rebuttal.
"When was the last time you heard of an aethiest (sic) terrorist?"
The Bader-Mannhoff gang, the Shining Path Marxists in Peru... The list goes on and on. Until the fall of the Soviet Union, the world has been going through a cycle of mostly Atheistic terrorists that has lasted over 100 years. Remember World War 1? Who killed the archeduke Ferdinand and kicked it off? Terrorism is no more exclusive to religions than flight is to insects, unless you want to call both Marxism and Anarchism religions.
Oh, and Echelon hardly trips on generic words such as terrorism. If you want to bug the NSA, you'll get much better results with specific tech words, such as the names of explosives or particularly correct technical names for nuclear or biological warfare elements. Also saying POTUS instead of "the president" is a nice touch.
In the past, terrorists have tended to target planes partly because many of them were trained along communist lines. Terrorists tended to get a lot of Marxist class theory mixed with their bombmaking 101, and believe that preferred targets were the ones "used by the ruling classes". Subways were too proletarian for their tastes. It would be interesting to know if the current generation of terrorists is working from similar assumptions. I wouldn't be surprised if Al-Quida thinks they are selectively targeting Jews by using planes and hitting financial offices, but they can't be getting much of their doctrine from the old Marxists, as those would have been very vehement about NOT hitting the pentagon or the White House.
Oxen can't compute 1+1, but if you work with unneutered bulls and cows, you can easily see the answer is 3. Would you rather plow a field with the 12th generation progeny of 1023 chickens and 1 rooster or 2 very old oxen?
Stern, like Jerry Springer and others, has tended to get a demographic that is sometimes (uncharitably) referred to as "trailer park trash". He ends up with a big fanbase that doesn't have enough money to buy the products advertised on his show. When an advertiser finds that reaching those particular 3 million listeners isn't working as well as expected, it bails on the show, leaving the marketing dept. to find another sucker who will support Stern. A high turnover is self amplifying, as advertisers who have left the Stern show talk with other companies.
Howard Stern's parent corporation has to make up some excuse for dropping Stern's show in some markets, because telling the truth, or even just keeping silent, will awaken more corporate sponsers to how little reliabiilty there is in advertising driving sales, and how often it doesn't produce the required results. They will stop caring about raw demographics or carefully selected ones slanted to the broadcaster's viewpoint, and look for genuine markets.
The perfect material for a case seems to be stained glass!
1. It's got good heat resistance and is seriously non-combusting for the extreme overclockers out there. While it won't help cool the computer much, computers don't cool by radiation much anyway, so that drawback is really trivial.
2. Leading canes are mostly real lead, and are put together with silver based solder, and panes are tinted with various metals (for example the usual bright red glass has about 5% metallic gold by weight inside, and blues are usually achieved with cobalt or copper). This means stained glass is a functional EMF shield, which those plexiglass windows are not. Just use lead crystal instead of plain glass for the completely clear panes, and your system should remain UL compliant.
3. It's a high prestige material, at least on a par with walnut burl. It's commonly used in upscale construction and implies both beauty and durability.
4. It will coordinate well with accessories such as Tiffany style desk lamps. Many computer accessories already feature substantial areas of luminescent glass, (although sadly most of these offset it with cheap plastic trim in colors such as beige or black).
5. Glass is an excellent insulator for electron flow. Connectors can be fitted direct to holes cut or drilled in glass and not trimmed with leading, to keep users safer from shock than conventional metallic cases.
6. no other material occurs in so many varieties of opacity, from clear or monochrome tinted varieties to extremely sophisticated polylucent and irridescent finishes. Individual pieces are often found in unique patterns, every bit as much a never to be duplicated arrangement as any wood grain pattern.
Why does anyone in the miltary get training on dealing with privacy? Their job is to inflict force as necessary, not ensure anyone's privacy. Hint: Our combat helicopters are mostly dark green, but not training on privacy issues seems like a good step towards painting them black.
And isn't a videotape like this evidence? Why should cops be trained that you don't just hand evidence over to anyone who wants to broadcast it? Why would we want to train police in handling evidence at all? Sounds like a waste of taxpayer money to me.
My city's public library did something similar. However, there are two towns with pop. 5,000 or so, that each have a small library, and a little town of only 300 people that has a 1 room library above the odd fellows hall, and so on, within 50 miles of home. I know a place where one red cross building serves 7 counties, and only one of those seven has any funding for the whole service. I know volunteer rural fire depts. that want a single machine, capable of pulling up maps from the internet, and nothing more. I know a NFP ambulance service that has a spare vehicle, but wants a single terminal connected to police dispatch to get more use out of it.
Some of these little libraries and such are happy to bother fixing up old gear, learning Linux, and so on. Others prefer old gear, because they have someone trained to use program X, but he's a retired volunteer, and doesn't want to have to learn the new improved, more bells and whistles program X+7 for Windows. Of course, that won't take care of nearly all the old machines out there, but every bit helps.
Then there's using that old computer to UnRar or Unzip files, and compressing things you don't need often to it, or to run time intensive software for tasks such as converting AVI to MOV files. There are lots of tasks that you would be better having them take overnight on a secondary machine than lock up your main machine for a single hour.
OR cache all downloads there and run AV software before you transfer the files to your main machine.
OR Keep electronic copies of all your hardware manuals for the new machines on the old machine, (and maybe vice versa).
I've never wasted time on a 'me too' post on slashdot, but just 'me too'ing this one was really tempting.
In all too many cases, the people who are demanding the loudest that the law be followed are the very people who could not possibly make their money following the law. This survey incorporates many of their assumptions, which proceed from such principles as "What's mine is mine, and what's yours is negotiable", or "Everyone cheats somehow, the question is how much". I won't answer questions from people who assume I'm a criminal.
What the?
Oh, you thought that part about "stuff that matters" was serious?
If I thought I was signing on to a serious site where real IT professionals were likely to discuss things that related to their livelyhood, society at large, and trends that could affect the whole gestalt of the future, all considered according to professional standards, I wouldn't have chosen AssProphet as a nym, but then, that's just me. That's not intended as a slam against your chosen form of anonimity. Really, some of my own nyms are not what I'd use if I was representing myself professionally, to a group of people who collectively had serious chops.
On the other hand, if I was a slashdot editor, and I looked over the nyms of the people already commenting on this story, I'd seriously figure these were just the sort of people who might like a dead badger story.
These days, Hollywood would never develop a concept like that. They'd have to add a big boss over the ICP's, and you couldn't just use motorcycles for the chase scenes, you would have to add tanks or something for variety. Without such changes, what you're describing would look like a cheap Disney flick.
Ouch! But seriously, proving Motive is optional anyway. DAs like to establish motives for crimes, but proving the action happened and the criminal had intent is enough in most cases. In this case, the DA shouldn't have to show whether the manager who did it was being directed by higher management or came up with the scheme as a way of bucking for a promotion, to get a jury to convict. He's guilty either way.
Slashdot Mirror
"Is it fossilization of the brain, which isn't physiologically possible at the ancient age of 40 -you're at your peak, really -"
Even at 40, you're probably not at your peak yet, unless you choose to be.
There's been a number of myths about this for way too long. People point to scientists such as Einstein, ignoring the Maxwelloids and Lord Kelvenites who did some of their best work after 40, or occasionally 60. Buckminster Fuller was famous enough to pose at age 40 for a bust commemorating his career in 1929, but practically everything he is now noted for he did after that. The same sort of examples can be cited for art and music (Look at what Bach did after 40). I'm citing mostly historical figures because, if anything modern medicine is making the chance of outstanding performance in later life grater and greater.
Meanwhile, some people ignore counter-evidence of rather obvious kinds. (For example, the US Army is generally a young man's game for purely physical reasons, but they grant hundreds of age wavers to keep talented people over age 60 in every year. These are people being kept primarily for their mental skills, and who are also willing to work hard enough at keeping up their physical abilities to not be knocked out for not being able to do 50 push ups on a test before they are even eligible for a waver - obviously that's a lot more selective a pool than in the tech industry, where a diabetic or wheelchair bound person is unlikely to be rejected on those grounds before they even get rejected for age biases).
Actually, /. posters tend to be relatively fluent. Many of them write in complete sentences, spell moderately well, and the cognative dissonance that results from a truly basic communications problem is relatively rare (relative to the average net forum, not necessarily as compared to a graduate classroom in a good university). In fact, I'd say "many Slashdot comments betray", rather than "most".
What I note in discussions such as this one is a need for deeper fluency in logic. If you were to go back through this thread, and note how many posts throw around "all", "every", and other collective phrases that are structured specifically so as to commit the fallacy of the excluded middle, and then extrapolate what this means in the more general case, I suspect you too might move English instruction to second place.
Notice how you, whether by training or concious choice, avoided the hyperbole of saying "all Slashdot comments", or even using phrases such as "the vast majority of". This is just what we need to cultivate.
To several libertarians posting to this thread, you can make a quite rational case that laws to prevent outsourcing to India or even Mexico are unworkable protectionism, and are often racially motivated. Trying to broaden that case, to include the PRC, where many labor sources are literally slave labor, doesn't strengthen your arguement. Rather it sounds like 1984. Slave is the opposite of free, and talking about a "free" market that includes actual slavery in this manner would not be part of your dialog if you were not trying to turn a genuinely extant some into a doctrinal all.
Not so silly - I'm sure you've seen how seriously some people take the black helicopter thing. More likely to look dark is an OD one silouetted against a bright sky. Hey, all military stuff looks black in the dark, except possibly specialist Skippy.
(I'm sorry the web site is down, but there used to be a list of things specialist Schwarz/Skippy wasn't allowed to do in the Army, with a lot of great lines like
"2. My proper military title is 'Specialist Schwarz', not 'Princess Anastasia'."
or
"60. 'The Giant Space Ants' are not at the top of my chain of command."
if anybody can find the whole list, a link would be verra verra nize.)
1. I can see how you parsed it, but if you read closely, I didn't say that Stern had only a 3 million person fan base, I said that (an example) advertiser might be aiming at only 3 million of them.
2. You can call it "made up rantings" if you want. Point is, Stern can turn x amount of profit if his advertisers pay CBS Radio/Infinity, whether his advertisers keep turning a proportionate amount of profit or not. To make it real blunt - His profit is for his company, not his sponsers. A profit for one does not have to be a profit for the other - the two are only loosely indexed. If you have some proof that all advertising is equally well priced and any company can predict an exact guarenteed in advance profit by simply devoting x amount to advertising, why are you posting to slashdot instead of buying 100% control of Clearchannel from your petty cash reserves?
Most marxists were trained by the now defunct KGB. Hitting the president and the joint chiefs is something called a decapitation strategy. Military doctrine is "A nuclear power would only try to take them out because it plans to launch a first strike and hopes to make it impossible for the US chain of command to pass along the codes to retaliate."
Did you ever see Air Force One, that stupid movie where Harrison Ford plays the president of the US and terrorists hijack his plane? Towards the end, a break away former Soviet state, known to have nukes, lauches fighters to persue Air Force 1 and proves it was them behind the plot. In the real world, that would have been seen as the start of a nuclear exchange, and the acting President would have dropped about 2,000 Mtons on any and all suspected launch sites in that break away republic before Harrison Ford could have thrown that last guy off the tail ramp. You don't kill everyone on the other side because you're sure its about to go nuke, you go nuke first because it is likely nobody else with nukes would be stupid enough to try to wack the immediate chain of command for any lesser reason, so you launch because you can't afford to risk waiting to find out for sure.
USSR sponsored terrorists were always expected to do things which would hamper the US, WITHOUT starting WW3. They trained with that limitation, and either knew it or their handlers did.
Al-Quida was lucky people here pretty quickly figured out what was going on. By the time our armed forces had a target, they knew what was happening looked less and less like a decapitation strategy with increasing data, and even worst case intel said whoever was ultimately behind it couldn't have enough nukes to win a war. Al-Quida was also dumb, in that they took a real risk of us not figuring that out quickly, and turning some or all of their supporting states into a sea of glass, maybe along with a lot of other people. Thank God it didn't happen, but there was a real risk.
Why? I don't really know, so what follows is speculative. Words get added to or subtracted from Echelon's lists by people who have the authority, and they don't usually explain why, although sometimes we can guess. Supposedly, both POTUS and FLOTUS were added to a list about the time Janet Reno was, and cross indexed with whatever names the secret service uses for those two. It's a fair bet and common guess for Ehelon watchers that Reno's name has been kept on Echelon's list for some additional time after her retirement, as some of our domestic right wing kooks have decided their issues with her are personal, but why anyone was particularly concerned about someone linking BC's (and now GWB's) secret service nickname with the office is beyond me.
"Son of the Great Satan" is probably the kind of phrase that exists in too many variants to much concern the NSA, so it may not even be on there, but some particular variants might. "Running Dog" sounds Chinese, and is possibly not on the current lists because we're more worried about south west Asia than east Asia right now. Note the possibly and probably - either phrase may in fact be on there. If I knew for certain, would I be allowed to say?
Since this post has doubtless tripped a few filters, I'll just close by saying "Hi Jeff at Langley!".
"... the famous margarine-powered NAZIVAC ..."
Holreth's card tabulating systems, originally purchased as "a tool for for census calculations". The little punch hole the Nazis set aside for jew turned out to be very handy - or did you think computing started with ENIAC?
"and really did create a lot of internal passports
didn't have to, as he merely inherited that system."
The increase during the Nazi era in the amount of paperwork required to travel, both within the Reich and abroad, and to engage in economic activities while doing so, is extremely well documented, and is the consensus of most historians today. I'd suggest you ask the Simon Weisenthal Foundation if they have any examples of control paperwork specifically devised during the Naza era and not previously. (Hint: they have over 500 such documents on permanent display in Washington DC. in the holocaust museum, and yes, professional historians already have gone through the collection, categorizing which documents were merly modified forms of older papers with a swastika or eagle overlay and which were completely new paperwork.).
Incidentally, Urban Legend's "debunking' of the claim that various National Socialists supported more gun control has itself been criticized by several organizations. So, I was right about 2 out of 3, willing to split with you on the first point if the NRA's website is considered no more reliable than Urban legends, and you're worried about what hasn't "percolated" down to me? Sometimes the accent on AC really needs to be placed on the 5th and 6th syllables.
Slippery Slope arguements also get developed from historical facts, and may have more validity there. Hitler really did oppose most private gun ownership, really bought big computers (for his time) and put lots of data on people in them, and really did create a lot of internal passports and paperwork to facilitate tracking his own citizens. Those were three steps down a real slippery slope and not just an extrapolated one.
Things that have been steps down a very ugly slope in the past should get special scrutiny when they turn up again. Sometimes it's not just a question of there being lots of data in a census computer, it's a matter of people who promised to use that data only in selected ways having been caught lieing about it. You're quite right in saying putting some already existing information in a computer isn't a significant step down amy slope slippery or non (which seems to be one of your points), but one of the issues here is that some of the statements the government is making seem to contradict others.
If we assume everything that might be a step has strong potential to lead to a horrible totalitarian nightmare, we'll wind up worrying whenever some politician makes a train run on time, or designs a cheap, gas efficent compact family car with a domed roof design, but if we assume no step has much potential, we may let a dozen warning signs go by unnoticed.
Note: If you're moderating this, please read Godwin's law before thinking it applies to all posts that contain the word Hitler.
Cause they don't accept American Express, right?
I agree that a 'Christian' terrorist group is quite possible (If Oklahoma City isn't proof there are already some out there), and that genuine education and social justice are both needed to steer the uncommitted towards non-violent methods, but your last question begs for a rebuttal.
"When was the last time you heard of an aethiest (sic) terrorist?"
The Bader-Mannhoff gang, the Shining Path Marxists in Peru... The list goes on and on. Until the fall of the Soviet Union, the world has been going through a cycle of mostly Atheistic terrorists that has lasted over 100 years. Remember World War 1? Who killed the archeduke Ferdinand and kicked it off? Terrorism is no more exclusive to religions than flight is to insects, unless you want to call both Marxism and Anarchism religions.
Oh, and Echelon hardly trips on generic words such as terrorism. If you want to bug the NSA, you'll get much better results with specific tech words, such as the names of explosives or particularly correct technical names for nuclear or biological warfare elements. Also saying POTUS instead of "the president" is a nice touch.
In the past, terrorists have tended to target planes partly because many of them were trained along communist lines. Terrorists tended to get a lot of Marxist class theory mixed with their bombmaking 101, and believe that preferred targets were the ones "used by the ruling classes". Subways were too proletarian for their tastes. It would be interesting to know if the current generation of terrorists is working from similar assumptions. I wouldn't be surprised if Al-Quida thinks they are selectively targeting Jews by using planes and hitting financial offices, but they can't be getting much of their doctrine from the old Marxists, as those would have been very vehement about NOT hitting the pentagon or the White House.
Oxen can't compute 1+1, but if you work with unneutered bulls and cows, you can easily see the answer is 3. Would you rather plow a field with the 12th generation progeny of 1023 chickens and 1 rooster or 2 very old oxen?
Our salesrep will contact you ASAP. Would you be interested in our gold plated case option?
Stern, like Jerry Springer and others, has tended to get a demographic that is sometimes (uncharitably) referred to as "trailer park trash". He ends up with a big fanbase that doesn't have enough money to buy the products advertised on his show. When an advertiser finds that reaching those particular 3 million listeners isn't working as well as expected, it bails on the show, leaving the marketing dept. to find another sucker who will support Stern. A high turnover is self amplifying, as advertisers who have left the Stern show talk with other companies.
Howard Stern's parent corporation has to make up some excuse for dropping Stern's show in some markets, because telling the truth, or even just keeping silent, will awaken more corporate sponsers to how little reliabiilty there is in advertising driving sales, and how often it doesn't produce the required results. They will stop caring about raw demographics or carefully selected ones slanted to the broadcaster's viewpoint, and look for genuine markets.
1. Work for government
2. Go into private industry
3. Do government's dirty work for them
4. It's not real censorship because you changed
hats.
It's for easy listening radio, for humpback whales. Since most humpbacks prefer speed metal, I say this is just another government boondoggle.
The perfect material for a case seems to be stained glass!
1. It's got good heat resistance and is seriously non-combusting for the extreme overclockers out there. While it won't help cool the computer much, computers don't cool by radiation much anyway, so that drawback is really trivial.
2. Leading canes are mostly real lead, and are put together with silver based solder, and panes are tinted with various metals (for example the usual bright red glass has about 5% metallic gold by weight inside, and blues are usually achieved with cobalt or copper). This means stained glass is a functional EMF shield, which those plexiglass windows are not. Just use lead crystal instead of plain glass for the completely clear panes, and your system should remain UL compliant.
3. It's a high prestige material, at least on a par with walnut burl. It's commonly used in upscale construction and implies both beauty and durability.
4. It will coordinate well with accessories such as Tiffany style desk lamps. Many computer accessories already feature substantial areas of luminescent glass, (although sadly most of these offset it with cheap plastic trim in colors such as beige or black).
5. Glass is an excellent insulator for electron flow. Connectors can be fitted direct to holes cut or drilled in glass and not trimmed with leading, to keep users safer from shock than conventional metallic cases.
6. no other material occurs in so many varieties of opacity, from clear or monochrome tinted varieties to extremely sophisticated polylucent and irridescent finishes. Individual pieces are often found in unique patterns, every bit as much a never to be duplicated arrangement as any wood grain pattern.
Why does anyone in the miltary get training on dealing with privacy? Their job is to inflict force as necessary, not ensure anyone's privacy. Hint: Our combat helicopters are mostly dark green, but not training on privacy issues seems like a good step towards painting them black.
And isn't a videotape like this evidence? Why should cops be trained that you don't just hand evidence over to anyone who wants to broadcast it? Why would we want to train police in handling evidence at all? Sounds like a waste of taxpayer money to me.
My city's public library did something similar. However, there are two towns with pop. 5,000 or so, that each have a small library, and a little town of only 300 people that has a 1 room library above the odd fellows hall, and so on, within 50 miles of home. I know a place where one red cross building serves 7 counties, and only one of those seven has any funding for the whole service. I know volunteer rural fire depts. that want a single machine, capable of pulling up maps from the internet, and nothing more. I know a NFP ambulance service that has a spare vehicle, but wants a single terminal connected to police dispatch to get more use out of it.
Some of these little libraries and such are happy to bother fixing up old gear, learning Linux, and so on. Others prefer old gear, because they have someone trained to use program X, but he's a retired volunteer, and doesn't want to have to learn the new improved, more bells and whistles program X+7 for Windows. Of course, that won't take care of nearly all the old machines out there, but every bit helps.
Then there's using that old computer to UnRar or Unzip files, and compressing things you don't need often to it, or to run time intensive software for tasks such as converting AVI to MOV files. There are lots of tasks that you would be better having them take overnight on a secondary machine than lock up your main machine for a single hour.
OR cache all downloads there and run AV software before you transfer the files to your main machine.
OR Keep electronic copies of all your hardware manuals for the new machines on the old machine, (and maybe vice versa).
OR at least they told you it was only for that particular device.
I've never wasted time on a 'me too' post on slashdot, but just 'me too'ing this one was really tempting.
In all too many cases, the people who are demanding the loudest that the law be followed are the very people who could not possibly make their money following the law. This survey incorporates many of their assumptions, which proceed from such principles as "What's mine is mine, and what's yours is negotiable", or "Everyone cheats somehow, the question is how much". I won't answer questions from people who assume I'm a criminal.
What the?
Oh, you thought that part about "stuff that matters" was serious?
If I thought I was signing on to a serious site where real IT professionals were likely to discuss things that related to their livelyhood, society at large, and trends that could affect the whole gestalt of the future, all considered according to professional standards, I wouldn't have chosen AssProphet as a nym, but then, that's just me. That's not intended as a slam against your chosen form of anonimity. Really, some of my own nyms are not what I'd use if I was representing myself professionally, to a group of people who collectively had serious chops.
On the other hand, if I was a slashdot editor, and I looked over the nyms of the people already commenting on this story, I'd seriously figure these were just the sort of people who might like a dead badger story.
These days, Hollywood would never develop a concept like that. They'd have to add a big boss over the ICP's, and you couldn't just use motorcycles for the chase scenes, you would have to add tanks or something for variety. Without such changes, what you're describing would look like a cheap Disney flick.
Ouch! But seriously, proving Motive is optional anyway. DAs like to establish motives for crimes, but proving the action happened and the criminal had intent is enough in most cases. In this case, the DA shouldn't have to show whether the manager who did it was being directed by higher management or came up with the scheme as a way of bucking for a promotion, to get a jury to convict. He's guilty either way.