Easy for you and maybe easy for me once I start rolling out CentOS7 (depends on how close to Fedora it is), but I'm describing vendors who tell you to disable iptables and SElinux or they won't give you any support. With one package it's only been three years since they upgraded part of it to run in better than 8bit color! I had to set up users with a second instance of X they could switch to when they wanted to use that stuff (less clunky than VNC). A very major geophysics package from a company starting with H and associated with a guy you should not go hunting with only moved to RHEL6/CentOS6 in March last year, and I've still got stuff on CentOS5 because the new version still has some bugs not in the old one. I'll give it at least five years before it will work on RHEL7/CentOS7, and even then I'm likely to have to keep an old version around. If their devs can't cope with iptables and SElinux then systemd is really going to mess up their heads.
Workstation software development, especially the commercial closed source kind, is very slow.
Read it all - “with the intention of preserving the child’s life” is the part that is really fucked up instead of the doctor being able to make an informed choice over whether to save the mother, the child, or both if they can.
But the nerve, right? Fuck that little sack of cells. Fuck their life. The ONLY important person in this situation is the mother. Who cares if she's seeking abortion at 24 weeks or 9 months (full term - and this does happen)? It's still a little non-human who should shut-up and die. (That's sarcasm, in case you couldn't tell with your stunted sense of morality).
You fail to understand that the law pushed the exact reverse of that - as in fuck the mother, let her die, just save the baby because The State wants it that way. In my opinion having either way mandated by law is really fucked up. Let the medical staff do what they can and get the government out if the way. Putting the choice of who is to live or die in that situation in a law is ridiculous and dangerous micromanagement.
That change of definition is very problematic in areas you are unlikely to have considered. Do you want every miscarriage to result in a murder investigation? It's already happened with people some legislators consider not fit to be part of society, such as intermittent illegal drug users.
I find a bit odd that those who call themselves "conservative" have embraced a radical new idea of when a human life begins instead of the age old definition of it being at birth.
What we should be discussing (or someone else - the young rich whiteboy basement dweller demographic doesn't see a lot of what is going on in the world and that seems to be most of this site for the last few years), is the fetus, the thing itself, instead of trying to muddy the waters with word games. I don't have an answer but I hate that some of those who also don't have an answer are forcing their shit on others either with online bullying as mentioned by the article (spamming with propaganda) or by laws forcing a whole lot of regulations into the bedroom.
relatively rare for caching to provide big benefits except at large ISPs
One guess as to who is upstream from every-fucking-body. Didn't think too hard about the issue did you?
One unintended consequence of moving to https for traffic that doesn't need to be secure is that proliferation of MITM https traffic sniffing boxes at what seems to be just about every large or mid-sized corporation. Utter madness, accidents waiting to happen and teaching users to accept any request for a cert. In a lot of cases it's making things worse and not better. I'm hoping for a major breach and a bank taking one of those MITM box providers and whoever deployed it to court with a lot of press attention before everyone's secure traffic ends up as insecure as everything else.
If you read that first sentence you will realise exactly how wrong you are and why I have not even heard of that publication. Maybe check my spelling for another clue.
As for naive - US politics certainly looks like that at the moment. A fucking insane autocrat is attempting to lead a party with "republic" in that name as if George Washington didn't revolt to form a republic after getting out from under the rule of an insane autocrat - and people don't seem to notice! How fucking naive is that? A casino boss is telling them he cares and he is believed. How fucking naive is that?
The usual arguments against nanny state concentrate on what the state wishes to do to you
Which means it fits the description perfectly unless you want to argue that women are not citizens. I use the term because the pricks that want lots of red tape in the bedroom scream "nanny state" over lesser amounts of red tape over financial crime etc.
So, the abortion debate is not about "nanny state", nor is it about "choice" or "life". It is about whether the fetus is a human.
No, it normally rejects medical opinions, ties in with the debate on contraception and a pile of other things and is really just a stalking horse for having morality laws into the criminal code. It's our little watered down copy of Sharia law at home. We've already had drug addicts jailed for "murder" of their fetus based on slightly increased risk of miscarriage - how long before smokers and drinkers get jailed too? It's about punishing "scarlet women" as if we were in Iran.
There is plenty in the associated comments, especially people splitting on party lines in on issue that IMHO neither party should be fucking about with. However I'm mostly distracted by your sig that tends to make me think every single one of your posts is political whether it was intended to be or not.
These policies are clearly jingoistic and nativistic
Indeed, just like the protectionism of the Florida sugar growers led to corn syrup in everything and protectionism of steel led to both heavy industry moving offshore and a steel industry that failed to innovate. It happens a lot, even where you are sitting, is often stupid and can have unintended consequences.
I disagree. Deciding that a government should choose and tell the doctors and patients to fuck off is very much "anti-choice" in a very literal sense.
That we are having this discussion at all in a forum such as this is a bit of an indication of how intrusive this excessive red tape from those who say they are "small government" advocates is. The majority of the people here know fuckall about the topic but noise happens because excessive government interference has turned something that really doesn't matter to most of the people here into a defining point for political canditates.
Murder of a potential boy, so let the woman die instead. I thought that was bullshit and that the feminists were full of it until I read things like this:
jail terms of up to five years for doctors who terminated pregnancies after 24 weeks. The bill also required that women “in distress” be provided with “holistic care”. If a woman faced a risk of death or “serious and permanent physical impairment” after 24 weeks, doctors would be required to deliver the baby in a unit with neo-natal facilities “with the intention of preserving the child’s life”.
There are some seriously fucked up people in government out there that want to get in the way between doctor and patient in life and death situations. If that's not excessive red tape and "nanny state" then I don't know what is.
IMHO these things are about politicising a medical situation for the sake of a few cheap votes and whoever told you the "like getting a haircut" thing was most likely someone pushing some draconian laws for the sake of cheap votes.
Here's one from yesterday from the Australian state of Victoria which was voted on yesterday but didn't pass the senate:
The bill also required that women “in distress” be provided with “holistic care”. If a woman faced a risk of death or “serious and permanent physical impairment” after 24 weeks, doctors would be required to deliver the baby in a unit with neo-natal facilities “with the intention of preserving the child’s life”.
How fucked up is that? Force the doctors to try to preserve the baby instead of going with what they see as the best outcome for the situation. In that case government is deliberately trying to get in the way of medical expertise. Micromanagement by people with no idea how to manage a situation. The quote is from an Australian news site I subscribe to called "crikey.com.au" and by sheer fluke had an item on that topic today. There is a paywall but you can get around it with a free trial of a few days.
a woman who seeks abortion first need to speak to a doctor who had a special course
It's called a medical degree - they all know about those aspects because reproductive medicine is a major part of general practice and go through such things in detail before starting specialties. If they hit an edge case they are unsure about they refer to an Ob/Gyn specialist just as they would refer other odd things. At least that's what the doctors I know tell me. On the other hand the people who draft the laws have not had a special course. Maybe they should before taking control from those who have?
Even seemingly innocuous communications can reveal things that might raise privacy issues.
I addressed that above. Please try again after you have read my comment. You even managed to QUOTE the relevant portion apparently without reading it, but drew some weird conclusions about how it's perfectly safe if your upstream network provider knows everything in one instance but not another. Inconsistent.
All traffic should be end-to-end encrypted, period
Maybe you should consider implications before coming up with an empty slogan about putting burdens on others just to solve a problem that is not universal and can be solved in other ways.
I don't understand you. First the abortion supporters say it should be made as easy and as normal as possible, like getting a haircut
Near me recently a twelve year old, who had been raped and had a non-trivial risk of death if she took the child to term, had to go through a complex legal process at two levels of court to get approval. That's how badly things currently fail the "common-sense" test.
From the outside it looks to me like the abortion supporters want it to be possible without the state paying so much time consuming attention to the process. It's so incredibly abnormal for a medical thing that it is a million miles away from "getting a haircut".
Intrusive nanny-statists that want red tape in the bedroom and those that are not.
That really shows up that many of those that screech "small government" are not - they want to regulate what goes on in bedrooms and where you go to piss.
Is where you go to piss ontopic for Slashdot? Of course it is. It's an I pee address.
Now that is why the obvious kneejerk of "stupid druggies blowing themselves up" should be revised to discussions about faulty drug implements. It's like drinking coffee from a cup quickly welded up out of used razors when there are other cups out there.
Yep, goldrush mentality that allows bad designs to thrive will do that. See also "hoverboards" that catch fire.
As a kid I used to set fire to batteries to blown them up. Some of the batteries we have now used for things like this would go off like bombs in comparison.
Some textbooks were going for over a hundred bucks each even in the 1980s. Captive market. While there were plenty of second hand books around that doesn't help when it's a book that hadn't been used for the course before or a specialist course with only a few enroled. Expensive photocopies then become much cheaper than the alternative.
A lot of weirdness comes from the nonsensical idea that your computer owns the licence and not you. It probably wouldn't stand up in court but it's a frequently repeated bluff.
They pay less because the unit cost to supply it is very low and because the lower price is what the market will bear. There is no discount for reduced functionality. That is a fiction added on after the fact.
Unencrypted web sites shouldn't even exist anymore.
WTF? I'd say fix the browsers that can't deal with a transition instead of completely fucking up every form of caching that isn't a deliberate Man In The Middle attack. Local news, weather, entertainment - if there is nothing secret in the communications then why apply the extra overhead? Sure, you want to keep your bookface stuff secret from everyone but your friends, the hosters, their advertisers, law enforcement and anyone they can make a buck selling your traffic information to, but non-interactive stuff does not need the overhead and the history of what hosts you visit is all available anyway even if the content is encrypted. People can still build up a profile on you based on the URLs you ask for without the content. Trying to hide all content is not going to give you the privacy you seem to think you will be getting.
You misunderstand badly, in fact very badly, and it's not even about whether systemd is any good or not.
Workstation software development, especially the commercial closed source kind, is very slow. A major change in how things work such as systemd means that it will be several years before the devlopers of that sort of software even consider getting their software to work in the new environment instead of just telling users to use the old one. See also how many commercial packages still recommend turning SElinux off because they haven't got around to working out how their software can operate in that environment.
So until a lot of vendors dust off their rc scripts and work out what they have to change to run on a host with systemd there are plenty of their clients who will not be upgrading due to systemd itself.
Some of the last barriers (decent OCR in my case) have fallen
One of the truly annoying things is modern OCR was developed on *nix via extensive R&D projects but unavailable as a commercial product. The postal service paid for an implementation but various patents and no desire to sell to people on *nix kept it out of the hands of the general public.
Free market my arse. Deliberate anti-capitalistic behaviour and monopoly power kept it out of our hands.
If you enable automatic updates, that pretty manual
It's the default choice of a new install.
At least over the last few days I now have learned some valid reasons not to upgrade to Win10 - half a dozen applications that just would not work after the accidental upgrade. All are either niche, do deep networking stuff (openvpn would definitely need a reinstall after such a change but the user didn't know that and blamed MS) or inhouse stuff from a developer with a skillset that may not be up to scratch - but lots of stuff they needed to use went from working to not. MS has just shaken loose a couple of rusted on fanbois and they are now taking me seriously when I suggest that MS is not perfect.
Slashdot Mirror
Easy for you and maybe easy for me once I start rolling out CentOS7 (depends on how close to Fedora it is), but I'm describing vendors who tell you to disable iptables and SElinux or they won't give you any support. With one package it's only been three years since they upgraded part of it to run in better than 8bit color! I had to set up users with a second instance of X they could switch to when they wanted to use that stuff (less clunky than VNC).
A very major geophysics package from a company starting with H and associated with a guy you should not go hunting with only moved to RHEL6/CentOS6 in March last year, and I've still got stuff on CentOS5 because the new version still has some bugs not in the old one. I'll give it at least five years before it will work on RHEL7/CentOS7, and even then I'm likely to have to keep an old version around. If their devs can't cope with iptables and SElinux then systemd is really going to mess up their heads.
Workstation software development, especially the commercial closed source kind, is very slow.
You fail to understand that the law pushed the exact reverse of that - as in fuck the mother, let her die, just save the baby because The State wants it that way. In my opinion having either way mandated by law is really fucked up. Let the medical staff do what they can and get the government out if the way. Putting the choice of who is to live or die in that situation in a law is ridiculous and dangerous micromanagement.
That change of definition is very problematic in areas you are unlikely to have considered. Do you want every miscarriage to result in a murder investigation? It's already happened with people some legislators consider not fit to be part of society, such as intermittent illegal drug users.
I find a bit odd that those who call themselves "conservative" have embraced a radical new idea of when a human life begins instead of the age old definition of it being at birth.
What we should be discussing (or someone else - the young rich whiteboy basement dweller demographic doesn't see a lot of what is going on in the world and that seems to be most of this site for the last few years), is the fetus, the thing itself, instead of trying to muddy the waters with word games. I don't have an answer but I hate that some of those who also don't have an answer are forcing their shit on others either with online bullying as mentioned by the article (spamming with propaganda) or by laws forcing a whole lot of regulations into the bedroom.
One guess as to who is upstream from every-fucking-body. Didn't think too hard about the issue did you?
One unintended consequence of moving to https for traffic that doesn't need to be secure is that proliferation of MITM https traffic sniffing boxes at what seems to be just about every large or mid-sized corporation. Utter madness, accidents waiting to happen and teaching users to accept any request for a cert. In a lot of cases it's making things worse and not better. I'm hoping for a major breach and a bank taking one of those MITM box providers and whoever deployed it to court with a lot of press attention before everyone's secure traffic ends up as insecure as everything else.
If you read that first sentence you will realise exactly how wrong you are and why I have not even heard of that publication. Maybe check my spelling for another clue.
As for naive - US politics certainly looks like that at the moment. A fucking insane autocrat is attempting to lead a party with "republic" in that name as if George Washington didn't revolt to form a republic after getting out from under the rule of an insane autocrat - and people don't seem to notice! How fucking naive is that? A casino boss is telling them he cares and he is believed. How fucking naive is that?
Which means it fits the description perfectly unless you want to argue that women are not citizens. I use the term because the pricks that want lots of red tape in the bedroom scream "nanny state" over lesser amounts of red tape over financial crime etc.
No, it normally rejects medical opinions, ties in with the debate on contraception and a pile of other things and is really just a stalking horse for having morality laws into the criminal code. It's our little watered down copy of Sharia law at home.
We've already had drug addicts jailed for "murder" of their fetus based on slightly increased risk of miscarriage - how long before smokers and drinkers get jailed too? It's about punishing "scarlet women" as if we were in Iran.
There is plenty in the associated comments, especially people splitting on party lines in on issue that IMHO neither party should be fucking about with.
However I'm mostly distracted by your sig that tends to make me think every single one of your posts is political whether it was intended to be or not.
Indeed, just like the protectionism of the Florida sugar growers led to corn syrup in everything and protectionism of steel led to both heavy industry moving offshore and a steel industry that failed to innovate.
It happens a lot, even where you are sitting, is often stupid and can have unintended consequences.
Clue that it is not the case is at the start of the first sentence.
I disagree. Deciding that a government should choose and tell the doctors and patients to fuck off is very much "anti-choice" in a very literal sense.
That we are having this discussion at all in a forum such as this is a bit of an indication of how intrusive this excessive red tape from those who say they are "small government" advocates is. The majority of the people here know fuckall about the topic but noise happens because excessive government interference has turned something that really doesn't matter to most of the people here into a defining point for political canditates.
There are some seriously fucked up people in government out there that want to get in the way between doctor and patient in life and death situations. If that's not excessive red tape and "nanny state" then I don't know what is.
Or (c) from a different country and shocked at how unprincipled that bunch is now. I think even Nixon would blush.
Here's one from yesterday from the Australian state of Victoria which was voted on yesterday but didn't pass the senate:
How fucked up is that? Force the doctors to try to preserve the baby instead of going with what they see as the best outcome for the situation. In that case government is deliberately trying to get in the way of medical expertise. Micromanagement by people with no idea how to manage a situation.
The quote is from an Australian news site I subscribe to called "crikey.com.au" and by sheer fluke had an item on that topic today. There is a paywall but you can get around it with a free trial of a few days.
It's called a medical degree - they all know about those aspects because reproductive medicine is a major part of general practice and go through such things in detail before starting specialties. If they hit an edge case they are unsure about they refer to an Ob/Gyn specialist just as they would refer other odd things. At least that's what the doctors I know tell me.
On the other hand the people who draft the laws have not had a special course. Maybe they should before taking control from those who have?
I addressed that above. Please try again after you have read my comment. You even managed to QUOTE the relevant portion apparently without reading it, but drew some weird conclusions about how it's perfectly safe if your upstream network provider knows everything in one instance but not another. Inconsistent.
Maybe you should consider implications before coming up with an empty slogan about putting burdens on others just to solve a problem that is not universal and can be solved in other ways.
Near me recently a twelve year old, who had been raped and had a non-trivial risk of death if she took the child to term, had to go through a complex legal process at two levels of court to get approval. That's how badly things currently fail the "common-sense" test.
From the outside it looks to me like the abortion supporters want it to be possible without the state paying so much time consuming attention to the process. It's so incredibly abnormal for a medical thing that it is a million miles away from "getting a haircut".
Another way to look at it:
Intrusive nanny-statists that want red tape in the bedroom and those that are not.
That really shows up that many of those that screech "small government" are not - they want to regulate what goes on in bedrooms and where you go to piss.
Is where you go to piss ontopic for Slashdot? Of course it is. It's an I pee address.
Now that is why the obvious kneejerk of "stupid druggies blowing themselves up" should be revised to discussions about faulty drug implements. It's like drinking coffee from a cup quickly welded up out of used razors when there are other cups out there.
Yep, goldrush mentality that allows bad designs to thrive will do that. See also "hoverboards" that catch fire.
As a kid I used to set fire to batteries to blown them up. Some of the batteries we have now used for things like this would go off like bombs in comparison.
Some textbooks were going for over a hundred bucks each even in the 1980s. Captive market. While there were plenty of second hand books around that doesn't help when it's a book that hadn't been used for the course before or a specialist course with only a few enroled.
Expensive photocopies then become much cheaper than the alternative.
A lot of weirdness comes from the nonsensical idea that your computer owns the licence and not you. It probably wouldn't stand up in court but it's a frequently repeated bluff.
They pay less because the unit cost to supply it is very low and because the lower price is what the market will bear.
There is no discount for reduced functionality.
That is a fiction added on after the fact.
WTF?
I'd say fix the browsers that can't deal with a transition instead of completely fucking up every form of caching that isn't a deliberate Man In The Middle attack. Local news, weather, entertainment - if there is nothing secret in the communications then why apply the extra overhead? Sure, you want to keep your bookface stuff secret from everyone but your friends, the hosters, their advertisers, law enforcement and anyone they can make a buck selling your traffic information to, but non-interactive stuff does not need the overhead and the history of what hosts you visit is all available anyway even if the content is encrypted. People can still build up a profile on you based on the URLs you ask for without the content.
Trying to hide all content is not going to give you the privacy you seem to think you will be getting.
You misunderstand badly, in fact very badly, and it's not even about whether systemd is any good or not.
Workstation software development, especially the commercial closed source kind, is very slow.
A major change in how things work such as systemd means that it will be several years before the devlopers of that sort of software even consider getting their software to work in the new environment instead of just telling users to use the old one. See also how many commercial packages still recommend turning SElinux off because they haven't got around to working out how their software can operate in that environment.
So until a lot of vendors dust off their rc scripts and work out what they have to change to run on a host with systemd there are plenty of their clients who will not be upgrading due to systemd itself.
One of the truly annoying things is modern OCR was developed on *nix via extensive R&D projects but unavailable as a commercial product. The postal service paid for an implementation but various patents and no desire to sell to people on *nix kept it out of the hands of the general public.
Free market my arse. Deliberate anti-capitalistic behaviour and monopoly power kept it out of our hands.
It's the default choice of a new install.
At least over the last few days I now have learned some valid reasons not to upgrade to Win10 - half a dozen applications that just would not work after the accidental upgrade. All are either niche, do deep networking stuff (openvpn would definitely need a reinstall after such a change but the user didn't know that and blamed MS) or inhouse stuff from a developer with a skillset that may not be up to scratch - but lots of stuff they needed to use went from working to not. MS has just shaken loose a couple of rusted on fanbois and they are now taking me seriously when I suggest that MS is not perfect.