Yes I forgot, remove the need for plutocrats to bribe anyone. Fair enough but ask granddad about the days of "you can't run a coal mine without machine guns" to see how that worked out.
Sadly, historians have been saying in the last decade or so that McCarthy was actually right.
Which would make him an even bigger criminal because he did not reveal the lists of communists he said he had. So what is it to be? Imaginary lists of communists or hiding them from the authorities?
There were spies but not anywhere McCarthy was looking.
Its easier to buy one President than 535 members of Congress
True - even a country with as small an economy as Indonesia in 1975 can afFord to do it. Although technically it was a party donation he did turn up to collect it in person the day East Timor was invaded. Thus a government run as a US inspired democratic republic was denounced as a bunch of communists and pressure, including a veto, was applied in the UN to stop any other countries from interfering with their obliteration. So yes, it has happened and efforts to reduce the damage when it happens again are worthwhile.
He worked pretty hard to bypass the security on that network
You are a bit behind the times. The news from when it came out was that he had full access and didn't have to do that at all.
(Have you noticed that China and Russia are pretty chummy these days?)
China and EVERYBODY are chummy - they don't care who you are and what you do so long as you have cash, a UN vote, fishing rights, or something to dig up.
If somewhere around half the population didn't change their name at some time of their lives you'd have a point. As for point one, merely moving cities or changing jobs gives a lot of people a 'before' and 'after'.
They probably already had it. Some bright spark probably got a promotion for outsourcing all the data entry to somewhere overseas as has been done with medical records on occasion.
Now that is fucked up on two completely different levels and even a bit ironic. Electronic voodoo pushed on Hoover's FBI, in the days of kickbacks, by a bondage obsessed comic book writer being used for some very intrusive workplace harassment by idiots that haven't gotten over the idea that you can't own employees like slaves. Your boss does not own your life. Even the military can't stop you from getting married.
Let's have a third Central Intelligence Agency to connect it all together. We can call it Uber Homeland Security to avoid confusion with the second one. Sadly that's more likely than your idea of a complete change because of all the entrenched political appointees from both sides. We had a chance in 2001/2002 when the CIA was shown to have dropped the ball, but it was led by a guy who was good friends with a cheerleader turned President who didn't have the guts to cut out the dead wood.
It sounds like the proposed move of ms office to dotnet. Shifting an established codebase to another just for the sake of policy is rarely worth the pain.
A steel rod rolling mill I worked at in the early 1990s had Amigas displaying details of what was going on at each point in the line. The graphics was line drawings that looked very much like "Hitchhikers Guide" style. They were along the line and in the finishing area so a very hot and dusty environment with sealed plastic covers over industrial keyboards and sealed monitors. That was the monitoring system, the control system was something else and a bit older.
I think you are very misguided about both science and religion and how they are very different things that do not intersect. It's only when religion expands into politics that it can come into conflict with things that impede it's expansion into politics. Early in the 20th century many Churches were of the opinion that God created stuff and Darwin was just describing the ongoing process of how God was creating stuff. Then along came Christianity-Lite where for the sake of dumbing things down their God created everything and then went away and died or something, Creationism isn't just an insult to science, it's also apparently very bad theology.
presenting them the same raw data Darwin had collected
Already done that way - Galapagos finches
but for the vast majority of people science and religions will remain similar and roughly interchangeable
The general population are not as stupid as Hollywood suggests - people who cannot tell the difference have other things wrong with them as well. Now there are lay preachers who see science as their enemy in increasing the size of their flock (or franchise for the more cynical prosperity worship type) who will PRETEND that science is a rival religion - but once again, many things are wrong with that picture and not just one. If a God is so puny as to be threatened by Mendel (more pious than just about any evangelical) and Darwin then it's not much of a God is it? About 3/4 of the people that refuted the great flood theory of fossils were ordained and they put it down to learning more about God's creation instead of letting it shake their faith. Science plus Religion is like having a hat and a sock and they don't have to fight for space on the same foot or head.
Since you failed to prove your point, no, nothing like it, just an entirely ignorable off-topic stream of insults that marks you as more of a failure with each and every zero-content post. You put up the bullshit and it failed to test as anything else - utter failure by any measure other than word count.
Earlier generations with that qualification found roles in government and large businesses. Now an MBA is a more fashionable way to get to "officer level" but is it really any more suitable as a starting point? It's certainly far less involved yet more likely to create overconfidence that the education is enough to be effective in a role in an organization that is never quite going to be exactly as the textbooks say. So philosophy may be a poor choice for training, but this isn't training, it's education - the sort of thing the guys who work out the standard operating procedures do as distinct from the ones that follow the procedures. It's a starting point not a list of things on a clipboard. Unlike engineering (my starting point) it's probably not bad for managing problems (eg. running a room full of telephone switchboard operators) as distinct from solving the problem (spending decades to eventually develop automatic switchboards). We need some people to handle either approach instead of purely technical folk, whether we like it or not.
Ever since Exchange 2007 came a long its been a few trivial powershell commands to copy the contents of one mailbox into another.
Ever since Sendmail 1983 came along it's also been trivial to use any shell to copy the contents of one mailbox into another - but in this case since the mailboxes are not separate files the user is probably better off not fucking about with commands to manipulate email in an obfiscated database with other people's stuff in it and instead export directly from their mail client. If they know what they are doing, know that there is a very recent backup and they are the person that will clean up the mess, fine, otherwise it's not something to be recommended.
Write as useful of a summary as you can in the time you can spare, print it out, and put it where the new hire is certain to find it because someone dropped into the deep end is unlikely to have the time to do discovery on a collection of mailboxes.
Because you don't know how to structure a logical argument
Really? And you have structured a logical argument here? All your ridiculous name calling started when I refuted your stupid little spy game suggestions and your utter trash about all publicly funded science being worthless and prone to fraud. Your own failure to prove your predjudices should not be blamed on me. At least the sheer hypocrisy has been entertaining - calling me "fucktard" and then later whining about how I am "attacking" you with ad hominem attacks. So what makes you so superior that anything goes for you but a mild rebuke from others is not acceptable? From what experience, education training or exposure does your superior insight come from? How about some response to that other than insults - it can be very vague if you like but hopefully more productive than assertions that you've "won" some sort of discussion that is NOT A GAME.
The irony is that you don't see that your entire post boils down to ad hominem.
Asking what perspective you are looking at the issue from is an ad hominem? Well that rules out high school teacher or someone that took literature studies of some sort at University I suppose.
No, I'm asking why you've written so many long posts expressing how superior you are on these topics without actually telling us what makes you superior to the people who are actually in such a field or at least have a high school level understanding of the field - something you are unencumbered by which somehow gives you a vast amount more insight as a complete outsider. What makes you so much better than all those lesser mortals that work with science and technology? Your very long list of posts attacking entire professions speaks for itself and the message is very clear that you consider yourself a far better person than any of those untrustworthy professions like science and engineering - so why do you consider your own profession superior?
I lose? I'm the one who has had the long career with science and technology while you clearly didn't manage to pick things up in high school and never bothered to catch up later. So, I ask again, what manner of creature are you that makes you so much better than all those lesser mortals that work with science and technology? I'm still waiting for an answer.
While the nukes are definitely not for sale to anybody the diesels do have an advantage in being able to be entirely silent. The nukes need to run cooling pumps. Different roles anyway - missile platform versus intelligence gathering.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes I forgot, remove the need for plutocrats to bribe anyone. Fair enough but ask granddad about the days of "you can't run a coal mine without machine guns" to see how that worked out.
Which would make him an even bigger criminal because he did not reveal the lists of communists he said he had.
So what is it to be?
Imaginary lists of communists or hiding them from the authorities?
There were spies but not anywhere McCarthy was looking.
Ford is the one on record (Indonesia 1975). There may be others but not so blatant.
True - even a country with as small an economy as Indonesia in 1975 can afFord to do it.
Although technically it was a party donation he did turn up to collect it in person the day East Timor was invaded. Thus a government run as a US inspired democratic republic was denounced as a bunch of communists and pressure, including a veto, was applied in the UN to stop any other countries from interfering with their obliteration.
So yes, it has happened and efforts to reduce the damage when it happens again are worthwhile.
You are a bit behind the times. The news from when it came out was that he had full access and didn't have to do that at all.
China and EVERYBODY are chummy - they don't care who you are and what you do so long as you have cash, a UN vote, fishing rights, or something to dig up.
If somewhere around half the population didn't change their name at some time of their lives you'd have a point.
As for point one, merely moving cities or changing jobs gives a lot of people a 'before' and 'after'.
They probably already had it. Some bright spark probably got a promotion for outsourcing all the data entry to somewhere overseas as has been done with medical records on occasion.
Now that is fucked up on two completely different levels and even a bit ironic. Electronic voodoo pushed on Hoover's FBI, in the days of kickbacks, by a bondage obsessed comic book writer being used for some very intrusive workplace harassment by idiots that haven't gotten over the idea that you can't own employees like slaves. Your boss does not own your life. Even the military can't stop you from getting married.
Let's have a third Central Intelligence Agency to connect it all together. We can call it Uber Homeland Security to avoid confusion with the second one. Sadly that's more likely than your idea of a complete change because of all the entrenched political appointees from both sides.
We had a chance in 2001/2002 when the CIA was shown to have dropped the ball, but it was led by a guy who was good friends with a cheerleader turned President who didn't have the guts to cut out the dead wood.
There was that hack on a Russian oil pipeline control system many years ago that caused a bit of damage. They learned from us what was possible.
It sounds like the proposed move of ms office to dotnet.
Shifting an established codebase to another just for the sake of policy is rarely worth the pain.
A steel rod rolling mill I worked at in the early 1990s had Amigas displaying details of what was going on at each point in the line. The graphics was line drawings that looked very much like "Hitchhikers Guide" style. They were along the line and in the finishing area so a very hot and dusty environment with sealed plastic covers over industrial keyboards and sealed monitors.
That was the monitoring system, the control system was something else and a bit older.
I think you are very misguided about both science and religion and how they are very different things that do not intersect. It's only when religion expands into politics that it can come into conflict with things that impede it's expansion into politics.
Early in the 20th century many Churches were of the opinion that God created stuff and Darwin was just describing the ongoing process of how God was creating stuff. Then along came Christianity-Lite where for the sake of dumbing things down their God created everything and then went away and died or something, Creationism isn't just an insult to science, it's also apparently very bad theology.
Already done that way - Galapagos finches
The general population are not as stupid as Hollywood suggests - people who cannot tell the difference have other things wrong with them as well. Now there are lay preachers who see science as their enemy in increasing the size of their flock (or franchise for the more cynical prosperity worship type) who will PRETEND that science is a rival religion - but once again, many things are wrong with that picture and not just one. If a God is so puny as to be threatened by Mendel (more pious than just about any evangelical) and Darwin then it's not much of a God is it? About 3/4 of the people that refuted the great flood theory of fossils were ordained and they put it down to learning more about God's creation instead of letting it shake their faith. Science plus Religion is like having a hat and a sock and they don't have to fight for space on the same foot or head.
Since you failed to prove your point, no, nothing like it, just an entirely ignorable off-topic stream of insults that marks you as more of a failure with each and every zero-content post.
You put up the bullshit and it failed to test as anything else - utter failure by any measure other than word count.
Earlier generations with that qualification found roles in government and large businesses. Now an MBA is a more fashionable way to get to "officer level" but is it really any more suitable as a starting point? It's certainly far less involved yet more likely to create overconfidence that the education is enough to be effective in a role in an organization that is never quite going to be exactly as the textbooks say.
So philosophy may be a poor choice for training, but this isn't training, it's education - the sort of thing the guys who work out the standard operating procedures do as distinct from the ones that follow the procedures. It's a starting point not a list of things on a clipboard. Unlike engineering (my starting point) it's probably not bad for managing problems (eg. running a room full of telephone switchboard operators) as distinct from solving the problem (spending decades to eventually develop automatic switchboards). We need some people to handle either approach instead of purely technical folk, whether we like it or not.
Ever since Sendmail 1983 came along it's also been trivial to use any shell to copy the contents of one mailbox into another - but in this case since the mailboxes are not separate files the user is probably better off not fucking about with commands to manipulate email in an obfiscated database with other people's stuff in it and instead export directly from their mail client.
If they know what they are doing, know that there is a very recent backup and they are the person that will clean up the mess, fine, otherwise it's not something to be recommended.
I love the smell of burning bridges in the morning.
Write as useful of a summary as you can in the time you can spare, print it out, and put it where the new hire is certain to find it because someone dropped into the deep end is unlikely to have the time to do discovery on a collection of mailboxes.
Really? And you have structured a logical argument here? All your ridiculous name calling started when I refuted your stupid little spy game suggestions and your utter trash about all publicly funded science being worthless and prone to fraud. Your own failure to prove your predjudices should not be blamed on me. At least the sheer hypocrisy has been entertaining - calling me "fucktard" and then later whining about how I am "attacking" you with ad hominem attacks. So what makes you so superior that anything goes for you but a mild rebuke from others is not acceptable? From what experience, education training or exposure does your superior insight come from? How about some response to that other than insults - it can be very vague if you like but hopefully more productive than assertions that you've "won" some sort of discussion that is NOT A GAME.
Asking what perspective you are looking at the issue from is an ad hominem?
Well that rules out high school teacher or someone that took literature studies of some sort at University I suppose.
No, I'm asking why you've written so many long posts expressing how superior you are on these topics without actually telling us what makes you superior to the people who are actually in such a field or at least have a high school level understanding of the field - something you are unencumbered by which somehow gives you a vast amount more insight as a complete outsider.
What makes you so much better than all those lesser mortals that work with science and technology?
Your very long list of posts attacking entire professions speaks for itself and the message is very clear that you consider yourself a far better person than any of those untrustworthy professions like science and engineering - so why do you consider your own profession superior?
I lose? I'm the one who has had the long career with science and technology while you clearly didn't manage to pick things up in high school and never bothered to catch up later.
So, I ask again, what manner of creature are you that makes you so much better than all those lesser mortals that work with science and technology? I'm still waiting for an answer.
It's you I had in mind especially the links that don't back up your words.
While the nukes are definitely not for sale to anybody the diesels do have an advantage in being able to be entirely silent. The nukes need to run cooling pumps.
Different roles anyway - missile platform versus intelligence gathering.