If it was good to show this, so that parents would know what their children were doing, why not go all the way and show closeups of penetrative copulation?
Though I am somewhat ambivalent about this fine, it should be noted that it in no way infringes upon anyone's freedom of speech (or of the press). Free speech does not mean you must have access to every and all means of communication. Not being able to say certain things on *broadcast* television during certain predefined hours does not prevent you from saying them on cable, in cinema, DVDs, internet, books, magazines, etc.
Restrictions on what you can show during primetime broadcast television no more restricts free speech than restrictions on prayer in public schools restricts freedom of religion. If you're going to argue that the latter is offensive to you, then you must allow others to argue that the former is offensive to them.
and is actually one of the telling signs of Fascism
Please look up "fascism" in the dictionary.
By the way, there is no such thing as 'indecent' speech.
Unless, of course, it is conservative or libertarian speech. In which case the left will undergo intellectual contortions in an effort to deny it tolerance.
I'd rather see people writhing against each other like a bad Britney video than seeing a bunch of bloodied bodies and violence.
And yet like most Slashdot posters parroting this sentiment, you probably stood in line for hours to see Anakin get his limbs graphically sliced off and dunked in lava.
Man, the Dutch are so far ahead of us it's not funny.
And yet they are so so far behind us in other ways. For instance, only Arab immigrants are required to watch the racy film, immigrants with blond hair and blue eyes won't have to.
It's easy to simulate a teenage murder on television. A fake gun, a loud bang, and a bit of ketchup and you're done. It's easy. But simulating teenage nudity is much harder.
But that is NOT how Microsoft is promoting it. To read their ad copy, they make it sound like.NET should be for rapid development and long term carefully designed development, and very kind of development in between. It's for desktop applications, web applications, client/server applications, services, system software, device drivers (!), research, prototyping, production and anything else Microsoft can convince you to use.NET for. My own company is trashing a million lines of realtime embedded medical software because Microsoft has sold them on the.NET Kool-Aid.
If you're trying to min/max you're armor, then you're right. But this is a roleplaying game, not a war game(*). You're too focused on the rules to have time playing a character.
The advantage of the computer is that you can get this additional realism (or versimilitude, if you prefer that word) without having to worry about the numbers. The computer frees you from the statistics and lets you get on with the business of having fun playing a game.
How do you know which armor is the best? You don't! You can't tell except through actual experience whether the increased encumbrance bronze vambraces is worth the additional protection to the arms.
I've seen lots of other examples of guys with perl-syndrome posting perl scripts that could be done much easier with things like sed and awk.
I tend to do everything with bourne shell. I guess I have sh-syndrome. In my favor, however, I'm using it as "glue" to leverage the power of the rest of Unix, like grep, sed, awk, etc. That's what it's for.
Brandybuck: "Someone needs to empty the trashbins in the cubicles, they're starting to stink!"
Janitor: "Senior management hasn't told me to, so I won't. Instead I'll sit wasting my day by reading Slashdot. Remember, the needs of the company are dictated by senior management, not users."
Frankly, if some IT puke refuses to replace my broken harddrive because I'm just a user, all hell is going to break loose, along with a few of his teeth.
A group of users making "demands" of the IT department is somewhat inappropriate.
WTF? Your role is to serve the needs of the company, not for the company to serve you. You're no different from HR or Facilities in that regard. The person who needs to lose the attitude is YOU.
Actually, it depends on the people involved. While my company isn't as bad as what the poster described, I've seen enough stupidity not to immediately discount it. It seems like the dumber the person, the higher in IT they rise, and the more powerful friends they aquire.
So why didn't your call the cops and your lawyer when you got robbed? Really? Your options are *YOUR* options, and your 401K is *YOUR* 401K. Whatever you do, do NOT listen to the Slashdot fucks say there's nothing you can do.
An exective raided the 401K account at a company I once worked for. He ended up in jail and we won a class action suit against the company.
But I'm guessing you didn't, because you're lying.
I actually used ***** as a backdoor password for a system I once worked on. Really! The service department demanded a backdoor password to give the service people, so that they wouldn't be calling in all the time for passwords. I fought and fought, but the lure of a continuing paycheck was too much, so I finally relented. My second choice was eight spaces.
It's funny but I think a lot of customers & ISVs happily accept vendor lock-in in the case of Microsoft, but are hestitant when it comes to *NIX, even though in reality *NIX generally speaking turns out to be the more flexible (portable) platform.
My company is on its third year of porting a huge Unix codebase to Windows, and it looks like we'll have at least two more before the product is ready. We switched because the embedded RT Unix we were using was getting long in the tooth. But we COULD have ported to different embedded Unix in six months.
The key vulnerability we're talking about are open ports. Most 2002 Linux distros (and BSD, Solaris, HPUX, etc) have all their ports closed by default. Not every Linux, to be sure, but most.
You are talking complete nonsense. There is no 'old industrialist' model of software development.
Sure there was! And still is in places. The rows of desks have been replaced by cubicles, but the basic model is still with us in places. It the same model that allows a company to hand off development to faceless programmers half a world away. A great many companies still use the waterfall model and hand off development to large teams top-heavy with management, with superfluous process occupying most of a coder's time. Decades after the "Mythical Man-Month" was published, many companies still follow the failed model that Brooks dissects.
Read the article that quote points to. A bad patent is like throwing a rock through a window, an patent lawyers are like glaziers arguing that broken windows are good for (their) economy.
This is nothing new. The IRS has been doing this for decades. Withdraw too much money from the bank and get reported to the IRS. Deposit too much money and get reported to the IRS.
The only difference is that the IRS hasn't been "associated" with the Republican party like Homeland Security has, so no one cares. The hypocrisy out there is amazing. Tracking large cash transactions to stop terrorism is thought of as reactionary conservative government out of control. But tracking large cash transactions to stop drug smuggling or tax evasion is a big yawn. But there isn't any moral difference between the two, unless you base your morality solely on the party in power.
If developed nations produce less pollution, why does the US, which has 5% of the world's population, produce 25% of the anthropogenic greenhouse gases?
Look at the overall pollution. I can safely drink out of any river in the US. I cannot do the same in most developing nations. Smog covers the Mexico City and Delhi like a permanent brown umbrella, but I haven't seen a smog layer in Los Angeles for a couple of years. The US used to have a worse problem in this regard, but we have (along with most other developed nations) cleaned up our messes. Cleanliness has a value and we are willing to pay for it.
Developed nations ARE cleaner than developing nations. Even the form of pollution developed nations emit is cleaner. CO2, for example, is much much cleaner than raw sewage, toxic lead-based effluents, and coal soot.
You're not going to get serious campaign finance reform without the cooperation of congress and the senate. Really. So the first step is to throw the bums out and elect a new batch. But if we can do that, then we don't really need campaign finance reform.
Besides, "campaign finance reform" is such a loose nebulous phrase. I need to know what the specific proposal is before I sign on to it. I'm not about to support anything that would deny me the right to contribute how I want to the candidate of my choice, or would force a contribution out of me for a candidate I don't like. Individual contributors aren't the problem, lobbying and wholesale marketing of legislation is. I would propose removing all restrictions on contributions except for two: corporations and unions may not contribute. Then we can focus better focus on the lobbying and corruption.
Slashdot Mirror
If it was good to show this, so that parents would know what their children were doing, why not go all the way and show closeups of penetrative copulation?
Though I am somewhat ambivalent about this fine, it should be noted that it in no way infringes upon anyone's freedom of speech (or of the press). Free speech does not mean you must have access to every and all means of communication. Not being able to say certain things on *broadcast* television during certain predefined hours does not prevent you from saying them on cable, in cinema, DVDs, internet, books, magazines, etc.
Restrictions on what you can show during primetime broadcast television no more restricts free speech than restrictions on prayer in public schools restricts freedom of religion. If you're going to argue that the latter is offensive to you, then you must allow others to argue that the former is offensive to them.
and is actually one of the telling signs of Fascism
Please look up "fascism" in the dictionary.
By the way, there is no such thing as 'indecent' speech.
Unless, of course, it is conservative or libertarian speech. In which case the left will undergo intellectual contortions in an effort to deny it tolerance.
I'd rather see people writhing against each other like a bad Britney video than seeing a bunch of bloodied bodies and violence.
And yet like most Slashdot posters parroting this sentiment, you probably stood in line for hours to see Anakin get his limbs graphically sliced off and dunked in lava.
Man, the Dutch are so far ahead of us it's not funny.
And yet they are so so far behind us in other ways. For instance, only Arab immigrants are required to watch the racy film, immigrants with blond hair and blue eyes won't have to.
It's easy to simulate a teenage murder on television. A fake gun, a loud bang, and a bit of ketchup and you're done. It's easy. But simulating teenage nudity is much harder.
.NET is for rapid app development
.NET should be for rapid development and long term carefully designed development, and very kind of development in between. It's for desktop applications, web applications, client/server applications, services, system software, device drivers (!), research, prototyping, production and anything else Microsoft can convince you to use .NET for. My own company is trashing a million lines of realtime embedded medical software because Microsoft has sold them on the .NET Kool-Aid.
But that is NOT how Microsoft is promoting it. To read their ad copy, they make it sound like
If you're trying to min/max you're armor, then you're right. But this is a roleplaying game, not a war game(*). You're too focused on the rules to have time playing a character.
The advantage of the computer is that you can get this additional realism (or versimilitude, if you prefer that word) without having to worry about the numbers. The computer frees you from the statistics and lets you get on with the business of having fun playing a game.
How do you know which armor is the best? You don't! You can't tell except through actual experience whether the increased encumbrance bronze vambraces is worth the additional protection to the arms.
I've seen lots of other examples of guys with perl-syndrome posting perl scripts that could be done much easier with things like sed and awk.
I tend to do everything with bourne shell. I guess I have sh-syndrome. In my favor, however, I'm using it as "glue" to leverage the power of the rest of Unix, like grep, sed, awk, etc. That's what it's for.
So what? Windows is pre-installed by most OEMs, and does the job for most tasks.
Brandybuck: "Someone needs to empty the trashbins in the cubicles, they're starting to stink!"
Janitor: "Senior management hasn't told me to, so I won't. Instead I'll sit wasting my day by reading Slashdot. Remember, the needs of the company are dictated by senior management, not users."
Frankly, if some IT puke refuses to replace my broken harddrive because I'm just a user, all hell is going to break loose, along with a few of his teeth.
A group of users making "demands" of the IT department is somewhat inappropriate.
WTF? Your role is to serve the needs of the company, not for the company to serve you. You're no different from HR or Facilities in that regard. The person who needs to lose the attitude is YOU.
Actually, it depends on the people involved. While my company isn't as bad as what the poster described, I've seen enough stupidity not to immediately discount it. It seems like the dumber the person, the higher in IT they rise, and the more powerful friends they aquire.
So why didn't your call the cops and your lawyer when you got robbed? Really? Your options are *YOUR* options, and your 401K is *YOUR* 401K. Whatever you do, do NOT listen to the Slashdot fucks say there's nothing you can do.
An exective raided the 401K account at a company I once worked for. He ended up in jail and we won a class action suit against the company.
But I'm guessing you didn't, because you're lying.
I actually used ***** as a backdoor password for a system I once worked on. Really! The service department demanded a backdoor password to give the service people, so that they wouldn't be calling in all the time for passwords. I fought and fought, but the lure of a continuing paycheck was too much, so I finally relented. My second choice was eight spaces.
Actually, they shouldn't be writing code for any system.
Mod parent down. Not only is this quote incorrect, it is so incorrect I must surmise that zhiwenchong is the new pseudonym for Cliff Clavin.
It's funny but I think a lot of customers & ISVs happily accept vendor lock-in in the case of Microsoft, but are hestitant when it comes to *NIX, even though in reality *NIX generally speaking turns out to be the more flexible (portable) platform.
My company is on its third year of porting a huge Unix codebase to Windows, and it looks like we'll have at least two more before the product is ready. We switched because the embedded RT Unix we were using was getting long in the tooth. But we COULD have ported to different embedded Unix in six months.
The key vulnerability we're talking about are open ports. Most 2002 Linux distros (and BSD, Solaris, HPUX, etc) have all their ports closed by default. Not every Linux, to be sure, but most.
You are talking complete nonsense. There is no 'old industrialist' model of software development.
Sure there was! And still is in places. The rows of desks have been replaced by cubicles, but the basic model is still with us in places. It the same model that allows a company to hand off development to faceless programmers half a world away. A great many companies still use the waterfall model and hand off development to large teams top-heavy with management, with superfluous process occupying most of a coder's time. Decades after the "Mythical Man-Month" was published, many companies still follow the failed model that Brooks dissects.
Read the article that quote points to. A bad patent is like throwing a rock through a window, an patent lawyers are like glaziers arguing that broken windows are good for (their) economy.
This is nothing new. The IRS has been doing this for decades. Withdraw too much money from the bank and get reported to the IRS. Deposit too much money and get reported to the IRS.
The only difference is that the IRS hasn't been "associated" with the Republican party like Homeland Security has, so no one cares. The hypocrisy out there is amazing. Tracking large cash transactions to stop terrorism is thought of as reactionary conservative government out of control. But tracking large cash transactions to stop drug smuggling or tax evasion is a big yawn. But there isn't any moral difference between the two, unless you base your morality solely on the party in power.
Been that way since the '80s.
Bush hasn't been president since the '80s, so that cannot be true!
If developed nations produce less pollution, why does the US, which has 5% of the world's population, produce 25% of the anthropogenic greenhouse gases?
Look at the overall pollution. I can safely drink out of any river in the US. I cannot do the same in most developing nations. Smog covers the Mexico City and Delhi like a permanent brown umbrella, but I haven't seen a smog layer in Los Angeles for a couple of years. The US used to have a worse problem in this regard, but we have (along with most other developed nations) cleaned up our messes. Cleanliness has a value and we are willing to pay for it.
Developed nations ARE cleaner than developing nations. Even the form of pollution developed nations emit is cleaner. CO2, for example, is much much cleaner than raw sewage, toxic lead-based effluents, and coal soot.
You're not going to get serious campaign finance reform without the cooperation of congress and the senate. Really. So the first step is to throw the bums out and elect a new batch. But if we can do that, then we don't really need campaign finance reform.
Besides, "campaign finance reform" is such a loose nebulous phrase. I need to know what the specific proposal is before I sign on to it. I'm not about to support anything that would deny me the right to contribute how I want to the candidate of my choice, or would force a contribution out of me for a candidate I don't like. Individual contributors aren't the problem, lobbying and wholesale marketing of legislation is. I would propose removing all restrictions on contributions except for two: corporations and unions may not contribute. Then we can focus better focus on the lobbying and corruption.