Learn to use rsync to backup between one computer and another (or synchronize the contents of a couple of computers) Once you're happy with how it works, set it up as a cronjob.
Get proficient with screen (lets you use one xterm as if it were more than one... let's you keep consoles open even when you kill the xterm and you can reconnect to them later)
CHOOSE between emacs and vi. Don't spend more than five minutes making this decision. Become proficient in the editor of your choice. Don't talk to anyone about your choice once you've made it.
Can some one please tell me why people still get caught for GPL violations like this. If you read these articles where people find GPL (or similar) violations in binaries released by big corporations, they always seem to get caught because somebody went and looked at the binary with "strings" or "xxd" or some hex-viewer and found strings that correspond to variables and functions in the infringed code. You'd think that after a few of these jokers got caught, they'd start making it harder for people to spot the violations. There are probably people on this board who could slam a script together to mangle all the names in a consistent way so that this stuff wouldn't work anymore.
I guess it's a good thing that these cheaters aren't just arrogant cheaters, but stupid cheaters too.
Empty box with Plank's constant (in a variety of untis) and a picture of a cat stamped all over the outside. Then when SCOX complains... "Your honour, we did our best to comply. It's not our fault that they openned the box."
6. I have heard that the protection software is really malware/spyware. Could this be true?
Of course not. The protection software simply acts to prevent unlimited copying and ripping from discs featuring this protection solution. It is otherwise inactive. The software does not collect any personal information nor is it designed to be intrusive to your computer system.
Also, the protection components are never installed without the consumer first accepting the End User License Agreement.
If at some point you wish to remove the software from your machine simply contact customer service through this link. You will, though, be unable to use the disc on your computer once you uninstall the components.
I call shenanigans. They say it's not designed to be intrusive, yet it hides itself by creating a security hole and it messes with your drivers. They say it's not installed without the consent of the user to the EULA yet the EULA doesn't appear to give sufficient details to make an informed choice as to whether or not you want this on your system. They offer a removal tool; however, once applied, you will not be able to use the CD in your system at all. This last implies that the tool either does an incomplete removal or adds further software to your system (does the removal tool come with an EULA?)
OK, I missunderstood a bit. I think my communication skills are running at half strength today.
I still think one of my points is important.
If the students are taught critical thinking then they will spot any BS you try to introduce into the curriculum. Your argument looses its basis because the students already know how to see through the trick.
You could turn it around too. If you want to be able to teach students BS then you can't teach them critical thinking. Even as "an alternative ideology" or such. As soon as you do teach them this, you run the risk of your students applying it to anything else you teach them and noticing the BS that has been included in the curriculum.
I think we have a bit of a chicken and egg situation between our points of view on this. You (if I understand your argument properly now) think that associating critical thought with BS concepts will cause students to think that it is BS and therefor undermine their ability to use the techniques needed for critical thinking. I think that if they are taught critical thinking, then they'll spot the associated BS for what it is and ignore it.
Perhaps I'm naive and give kids too much credit in assuming they would apply the critical thing to see through the problem you bring up.
I have trouble accepting that. Critical thinking is important to any field of inquiry. I, personally, am an agnostic with a PhD in chemistry (physical chemistry). Woopy. I also happen to come from a semi-religious family (lots of mennonites), some of whom have gone through seminary. Also, I live in a region with a large jewish population. Either way, I've noticed that those around me who try to go far in either science or theology require a lot of skill in critical thinking. You can't do good science without it. And you apparently can't do good theology without it either.
So, based on the small sample of my personal experience, I have trouble accepting your statement.
Putting science and religion on equal footing in the classroom is not, in itself, a threat to teaching students critical thinking. If you really have taught them critical thinking, then your argument is meaningless since they'll see through the charade.
A larger threat to critical thinking is the tendancy to just try to dump a bunch of info into a students head simply so they can regurgitate it onto a piece of paper at the end of the year...teaching them what to think, not how. As long as this is the goal of teaching, then it will be possible for anyone with an agenda to get just about anything into our classrooms under just about any heading they want. The only real defence students have against this is their ability to think for themselves and their BS-O-meters. Unfortunately, most of that is self-taught or taught in the home, not in school. So, most students who don't get if from home or stumble upon it by accident themselves, are left in the dark.
For what it's worth, I never learned critical thinking in science classes in highschool. I honed some observation skills and my ability to record what I ubserved under the better science teachers. The two places where I really learned critical thinking were with one specific english teacher and to a lesser extent, one specific math teacher. I sometimes feel that I owe my PhD to that one english teacher. Which says a lot about the quality of teaching in science, at least in my high-school (which was supposed to be one of the better ones at the time). It's too bad, even that english teacher; could't drive speling and gramar into my head.
Finally, someone gets close to the real problem. The problem isn't the ID is tought in schools, or if it should be tought in science classes vs. theology classes. The problem is that the students need to be tought how to think (not what to think).
They need to be tought how to do a bit of research and a bit of critical thinking. They need to know how to verify the information they are given and separate the facts from the propoganda. Once they've doen that, they need to then be able to think about the facts that they have and draw their own conclusions.
If you worry about teaching your students this, then you can expose them to evolution, creationism, cosmology, astrology, whatever you want, and they'll figure it out for themselves. Kids, given the opportunity and a little training, are not stupid.
Of course, that may be part of the problem here. People who can think for themselves are always such a complication in an unhealthy society. You never know what policies they might question.
OK, so we're talking about the difference between surgically slicing the abdomen open with a scalpel vs. ripping the abdomen open. In the end, what's the difference? Either way, you still end up with guts on the floor.
Someone else pointed out that this isn't generally how cats kill, and I'd have to say they're right, generally. I have, however, witnessed my cat slaughter a teddy-bear in this manner (she'd had a hard day, she'd gotten herself trapped in the closet and then had a bit too much catnip and the bear just looked at her kinda funny that one time too many and something in her just snapped). Doesn't matter how dull those hind claws are, the legs they're attached to are pretty f**king powerful and that kicking is pretty damned effective.
File transferes to MSN and Yahoo! used to be painfully slow... to the point where people would cancel on the other end because they lost patience. This seems to have improved a LOT in the recent versions, so if you still don't get good file transfer... upgrade.
The two biggest things I've noticed lacking are Nudges and voice/webcam stuff.
Nudges and can more than happily live without.
Voice/webcam support was attemted with an offshoot called gaim-vv (vv == voice and video). But that project has officially been laid to rest with a final note implying that some of the developers will try to merge the work into a later release of gaim.
There are also a lot of pluggins for gaim to support everything from rss to encryption. If you really desperately want a feature, leave a not on the "feature requests" thread of the sourceforge project page on sourceforge. Or if you're desperate and skilled, try to write it up yourself... this is open source.
I wonder if the fact that they "demoed Conroe on a system running Linux" means that they'll start providing GOOD Linux on more than just their CPU's. Sofar I haven't been impressed. I have a centrino laptop with an i915 graphics card. Getting wireless and DRI graphics to work reminded me of the early days of ATI's Linux support when you had to surf through 50 sites to find a cvs link and then kill a weekend getting it to even compile. Unless THAT changes, I don't care what their CPU's do, I'm not gonna touch another intel product while I have a choice.
Slashdot Mirror
Get proficient with screen (lets you use one xterm as if it were more than one ... let's you keep consoles open even when you kill the xterm and you can reconnect to them later)
CHOOSE between emacs and vi. Don't spend more than five minutes making this decision. Become proficient in the editor of your choice. Don't talk to anyone about your choice once you've made it.
I guess it's a good thing that these cheaters aren't just arrogant cheaters, but stupid cheaters too.
Empty box with Plank's constant (in a variety of untis) and a picture of a cat stamped all over the outside. Then when SCOX complains ... "Your honour, we did our best to comply. It's not our fault that they openned the box."
6. I have heard that the protection software is really malware/spyware. Could this be true?
Of course not. The protection software simply acts to prevent unlimited copying and ripping from discs featuring this protection solution. It is otherwise inactive. The software does not collect any personal information nor is it designed to be intrusive to your computer system.
Also, the protection components are never installed without the consumer first accepting the End User License Agreement.
If at some point you wish to remove the software from your machine simply contact customer service through this link. You will, though, be unable to use the disc on your computer once you uninstall the components.
I call shenanigans. They say it's not designed to be intrusive, yet it hides itself by creating a security hole and it messes with your drivers. They say it's not installed without the consent of the user to the EULA yet the EULA doesn't appear to give sufficient details to make an informed choice as to whether or not you want this on your system. They offer a removal tool; however, once applied, you will not be able to use the CD in your system at all. This last implies that the tool either does an incomplete removal or adds further software to your system (does the removal tool come with an EULA?)
OK, I missunderstood a bit. I think my communication skills are running at half strength today.
I still think one of my points is important.
If the students are taught critical thinking then they will spot any BS you try to introduce into the curriculum. Your argument looses its basis because the students already know how to see through the trick.
You could turn it around too. If you want to be able to teach students BS then you can't teach them critical thinking. Even as "an alternative ideology" or such. As soon as you do teach them this, you run the risk of your students applying it to anything else you teach them and noticing the BS that has been included in the curriculum.
I think we have a bit of a chicken and egg situation between our points of view on this. You (if I understand your argument properly now) think that associating critical thought with BS concepts will cause students to think that it is BS and therefor undermine their ability to use the techniques needed for critical thinking. I think that if they are taught critical thinking, then they'll spot the associated BS for what it is and ignore it.
Perhaps I'm naive and give kids too much credit in assuming they would apply the critical thing to see through the problem you bring up.
I have trouble accepting that. Critical thinking is important to any field of inquiry. I, personally, am an agnostic with a PhD in chemistry (physical chemistry). Woopy. I also happen to come from a semi-religious family (lots of mennonites), some of whom have gone through seminary. Also, I live in a region with a large jewish population. Either way, I've noticed that those around me who try to go far in either science or theology require a lot of skill in critical thinking. You can't do good science without it. And you apparently can't do good theology without it either.
So, based on the small sample of my personal experience, I have trouble accepting your statement.
Putting science and religion on equal footing in the classroom is not, in itself, a threat to teaching students critical thinking. If you really have taught them critical thinking, then your argument is meaningless since they'll see through the charade.
A larger threat to critical thinking is the tendancy to just try to dump a bunch of info into a students head simply so they can regurgitate it onto a piece of paper at the end of the year...teaching them what to think, not how. As long as this is the goal of teaching, then it will be possible for anyone with an agenda to get just about anything into our classrooms under just about any heading they want. The only real defence students have against this is their ability to think for themselves and their BS-O-meters. Unfortunately, most of that is self-taught or taught in the home, not in school. So, most students who don't get if from home or stumble upon it by accident themselves, are left in the dark.
For what it's worth, I never learned critical thinking in science classes in highschool. I honed some observation skills and my ability to record what I ubserved under the better science teachers. The two places where I really learned critical thinking were with one specific english teacher and to a lesser extent, one specific math teacher. I sometimes feel that I owe my PhD to that one english teacher. Which says a lot about the quality of teaching in science, at least in my high-school (which was supposed to be one of the better ones at the time). It's too bad, even that english teacher; could't drive speling and gramar into my head.
Finally, someone gets close to the real problem. The problem isn't the ID is tought in schools, or if it should be tought in science classes vs. theology classes. The problem is that the students need to be tought how to think (not what to think).
They need to be tought how to do a bit of research and a bit of critical thinking. They need to know how to verify the information they are given and separate the facts from the propoganda. Once they've doen that, they need to then be able to think about the facts that they have and draw their own conclusions.
If you worry about teaching your students this, then you can expose them to evolution, creationism, cosmology, astrology, whatever you want, and they'll figure it out for themselves. Kids, given the opportunity and a little training, are not stupid.
Of course, that may be part of the problem here. People who can think for themselves are always such a complication in an unhealthy society. You never know what policies they might question.
OK, so we're talking about the difference between surgically slicing the abdomen open with a scalpel vs. ripping the abdomen open. In the end, what's the difference? Either way, you still end up with guts on the floor.
Someone else pointed out that this isn't generally how cats kill, and I'd have to say they're right, generally. I have, however, witnessed my cat slaughter a teddy-bear in this manner (she'd had a hard day, she'd gotten herself trapped in the closet and then had a bit too much catnip and the bear just looked at her kinda funny that one time too many and something in her just snapped). Doesn't matter how dull those hind claws are, the legs they're attached to are pretty f**king powerful and that kicking is pretty damned effective.
The two biggest things I've noticed lacking are Nudges and voice/webcam stuff.
Nudges and can more than happily live without.
Voice/webcam support was attemted with an offshoot called gaim-vv (vv == voice and video). But that project has officially been laid to rest with a final note implying that some of the developers will try to merge the work into a later release of gaim.
There are also a lot of pluggins for gaim to support everything from rss to encryption. If you really desperately want a feature, leave a not on the "feature requests" thread of the sourceforge project page on sourceforge. Or if you're desperate and skilled, try to write it up yourself ... this is open source.
I wonder if the fact that they "demoed Conroe on a system running Linux" means that they'll start providing GOOD Linux on more than just their CPU's. Sofar I haven't been impressed. I have a centrino laptop with an i915 graphics card. Getting wireless and DRI graphics to work reminded me of the early days of ATI's Linux support when you had to surf through 50 sites to find a cvs link and then kill a weekend getting it to even compile. Unless THAT changes, I don't care what their CPU's do, I'm not gonna touch another intel product while I have a choice.
These guys made crude pipe-bombs out of glass, lit them, and then bashed them together. Even your average three year old would know better than that.
Dammit! Not again! I want to go and see a STAR WARS movie! Not a freakin' Celine Dion concert!
Think Gremlins (one of the original PG-13 movies) when considering Jar-jar's death scene.