Well, I am terribly sorry that my third language (Danish and German being the first two) is not perfect. But be that as it may, the "When $thing is outlawed only outlaws will have $thing"-meme is still a circular argument and it's still not funny.
Perhaps it's an American joke and you need to be an American to find it funny. Sorry you didn't find it so.
No, the accusation accuses him of hacking the grade server. Unless you think that accusation somehow doesn't deserve to be looked into then I don't see what the problem is.
That affidavit link was pretty good. The people who are claiming this is all because he called someone else gay or uses Linux should read it before pontificating. The student in question is accused of breaking into college systems to change grades and there is other evidence (DHCP logs) to suggest that he was behind these activities.
In all honesty, my rifle, my 4096-bit encrypted hard drive, and the idea that I choose the best operating system or combination thereof that suits me as a consumer do nothing but support the idea that I am a law-abiding, dutiful citizen.
Why do you need encryption if you have nothing to hide? Step away from the computer very slowly and place your hands on top of your head, you commie terrorist bastard;)
Hey, is it any surprise campus security are afraid of Command Line Interface Terrorism?
Yes, actually it is surprising. Anybody who has ever seen 24 knows that terrorists and the Government both rely on a single GUI interface for everything from tracking motor vehicles to taking over nuclear power plants.
While he hasn't proven he can out-Bush Bush in this particular area (see warrantless wiretaps and Internet security)
Obama voted for the legislation that ended any possibility we had of discovering the Bush abuses in this area. I'd say that he's at least his equal and will probably "out-Bush" him in the years to come. No reason to oppose expansions of Executive Power if you are the Executive, is there?
It makes sense that those with a lot of money would hire the best lawyers. Now that Obama chooses the cream of the crop, suddenly these guys are somehow no good?
What the hell makes you think that the RIAA lawyers are the "cream of the crop"? Their whole stragety seems to be based more on superior resources and intimidation. There isn't any legal brilliance at play here. In fact, based on the number of times they've been caught lying and all those times they've employed unlicensed investigators, I'm inclined to think that they are morons.
That's around $185 per second. That's quite a bit.
Not really. GM is losing around $540 per second if you break out the $4,200,000,000 quarterly loss they posted. Youtube's only problem is they aren't losing money fast enough to justify stealing money from the citizenry to stay afloat......
Thats mighty white of you, though genetic diversity is valuable too
Nice way to play the race card. Something tells me that you won't get modded down though, whereas somebody who used a six letter word starting with 'N' to make the same point already would have been.
I wonder if you would do anything to help dolphins if they saved [eurocbc.org] any human lives [guardian.co.uk] ?
I think his point was that we usually prioritize human life above that of other animals. For example, your dog doesn't get to come into the lifeboat if we need the space for another human being.
Active sonar really doensn't give anything away since once you launch a torpedo, the target, or anyone else in the area, is going to know where the sub is anyway.
What are you basing that assumption on? Modern torpedoes can be programmed to run a lower (i.e: harder to detect) speed until they get close to the target and/or further away from the launch platform. The loudest part of a torpedo launch is the "launch transient", i.e: the sound of the compressed air that pushes it out of the torpedo tube. Some submarines (the Seawolf class) use larger torpedo tubes that allow the torpedo to "swim" out without requiring a blast of compressed air, thus negating most of the noise of a torpedo launch.
Assuming that you are going to detect the launch is a very dangerous assumption in modern naval warfare. Your first indication of incoming "fish" is just as likely to be when they turn on their active seekers at close range and go to full speed. In that scenario you are virtually SOL and don't even have the means to retaliate.
So somehow complaining about the hate spewing from the right is, itself, poisoning things?
No, trying to make the claim that Rush Limbaugh speaks for the whole of the Republican Party is poisoning things. Any neutral observer can see how that's as absurd as trying to say that Michael Moore speaks for all Democrats.
It's amazing the level that the American people have ingested the rhetoric of the right.
It's amazing how you can't help but reveal your partisan ideology. From where I sit it seems like about 30-35% of this country has "ingested" the rhetoric of the right, another 30-35% has "ingested" the rhetoric of the left (what, did you think blind allegiance to ideology is unique to the GOP?) and the rest of us are just sick of the two extremes that keep fucking it all up. Too bad our primary system and political parties are tailor made to silence moderate voices while advancing the extremist ones.
Look, the fundamental rule of the GOP is to stand there and accuse your opponent of doing exactly what you're doing fifty times more. They've done it for decades.
Right, and so have the Democrats. That's how politics are played. The only difference is that most politicians don't base an entire campaign around the idea of a "new kind of politics" and then revert to the old type after only three months in office.
I.e, when the far right fringe is okay with imprisoning Americans without charges, but has a hissy fit over voluntary national service organizations, calling them 'reeducation camps', or who think that FEMA laws are a conspiracy to implement martial law
And how about the far left fringe that shouts at the top of their lungs about "civil rights" while simultaneously trying to gut the 2nd amendment? How about the "Bush lied, people died!" crowd that make excuses for Clinton's perjury? What about all of the Democrats blaming Bush for gutting the regulatory structure while remaining silent on all those regulations that Clinton did away with? What about the Democrats that condemn the Iraq War even though a majority of them voted for it?
Which was the original intent of Obama's comments, pointing out how Rush had suddenly started saying 'unamerican things' like wanting the president to fail that he'd been claiming the left was doing for the past eight years.
No, the intent was to win a few news cycles and beat the GOP over the head. I can't really say I blame them -- that's how politics are played after all -- I just think it's a tad bit hypocritical after the campaign that he ran. I probably shouldn't be surprised -- the Obama campaign was masterful at claiming to be above politics while throwing mud and playing politics.
Rush, however, had other ideas, and it turns out he was right about who was in charge.
Rush isn't "in charge" of the right any more than Keith Olbermann is "in charge" of the left. I do find the obsession with him to be quite amusing though. I've always found him to be a bit of a jackass myself but I do get a kick out of seeing Liberals enraged to the point of trying to legislate against him. What is it about him that pisses you off so much?
Why is it such a terrible crime that the Navy consider what damage it does to its surroundings?
What makes you think they don't already or that the damage to those surroundings is more important than our ability to keep the sea lanes open in the next shooting war?
Couldn't the sonar be replaced by something less damaging? I guess water muffles radio waves, so a water radar is not a good idea. Maybe a very low frequency radar?
The problem with that theory is that you'd need such a low frequency that your wavelength would be hundreds to thousands of miles. The antenna requirements alone would make such a system impractical on a mobile basis. Some of the antennas used for ELF submarine communications systems were up to 20 miles long.
Unless you can change the laws of physics I'm afraid we'll be stuck using sonar for the foreseeable feature. If you accept that then you have to accept the fact that the Navy needs to practice with it before they need it in an actual shooting war. Sucks that it apparently harms marine life but what can you do?
Slashdot Mirror
I thought about adding that in but figured it would all but ensure a -1 troll mod.
Well, I am terribly sorry that my third language (Danish and German being the first two) is not perfect. But be that as it may, the "When $thing is outlawed only outlaws will have $thing"-meme is still a circular argument and it's still not funny.
Perhaps it's an American joke and you need to be an American to find it funny. Sorry you didn't find it so.
No, the accusation accuses him of hacking the grade server. Unless you think that accusation somehow doesn't deserve to be looked into then I don't see what the problem is.
It's a circular argument and it has no merrits. And it's about as funny as a four legged horse.
Ironically enough that four legged horse has a better sense of humor than you do. It can also spell the word 'merits' correctly ;)
That affidavit link was pretty good. The people who are claiming this is all because he called someone else gay or uses Linux should read it before pontificating. The student in question is accused of breaking into college systems to change grades and there is other evidence (DHCP logs) to suggest that he was behind these activities.
Assuming that the student is 100% guilty... how exactly is sending an e-mail calling someone "gay" a crime?
Because if the PC police had their way it would be a crime to utter any statement that has the slightest chance of offending anyone.
In all honesty, my rifle, my 4096-bit encrypted hard drive, and the idea that I choose the best operating system or combination thereof that suits me as a consumer do nothing but support the idea that I am a law-abiding, dutiful citizen.
Why do you need encryption if you have nothing to hide? Step away from the computer very slowly and place your hands on top of your head, you commie terrorist bastard ;)
But the fact that it says he uses 2 operating systems to hide his activity
If they think dual-booting is "hiding illegal activity" I wonder what they'd think of full disk encryption?
Hey, is it any surprise campus security are afraid of Command Line Interface Terrorism?
Yes, actually it is surprising. Anybody who has ever seen 24 knows that terrorists and the Government both rely on a single GUI interface for everything from tracking motor vehicles to taking over nuclear power plants.
And Clippy? Clippy is dead.
You don't have to be computer literate to hate clippy. I think you just presented the defendant in a very sympathetic light ;)
Only outlaws will have Linux ;)
While he hasn't proven he can out-Bush Bush in this particular area (see warrantless wiretaps and Internet security)
Obama voted for the legislation that ended any possibility we had of discovering the Bush abuses in this area. I'd say that he's at least his equal and will probably "out-Bush" him in the years to come. No reason to oppose expansions of Executive Power if you are the Executive, is there?
It makes sense that those with a lot of money would hire the best lawyers. Now that Obama chooses the cream of the crop, suddenly these guys are somehow no good?
What the hell makes you think that the RIAA lawyers are the "cream of the crop"? Their whole stragety seems to be based more on superior resources and intimidation. There isn't any legal brilliance at play here. In fact, based on the number of times they've been caught lying and all those times they've employed unlicensed investigators, I'm inclined to think that they are morons.
That's around $185 per second. That's quite a bit.
Not really. GM is losing around $540 per second if you break out the $4,200,000,000 quarterly loss they posted. Youtube's only problem is they aren't losing money fast enough to justify stealing money from the citizenry to stay afloat......
It is amazing what a good actor can do with a single word.
Or sentence for that matter. I think my favorite acting moment from Star Trek was Patrick Stewart screaming "THERE.... ARE..... FOUR.... LIGHTS"
Ham may he have been- he could load a word with such conviction and emotion that you believed it down to your soul.
Denny Crane!
Thats mighty white of you, though genetic diversity is valuable too
Nice way to play the race card. Something tells me that you won't get modded down though, whereas somebody who used a six letter word starting with 'N' to make the same point already would have been.
I wonder if you would do anything to help dolphins if they saved [eurocbc.org] any human lives [guardian.co.uk] ?
I think his point was that we usually prioritize human life above that of other animals. For example, your dog doesn't get to come into the lifeboat if we need the space for another human being.
But what's wrong with the % measurement?
It's become a cheesy plot device that (along with exploding consoles) is used to convey suspense in the absence of good writing?
Active sonar really doensn't give anything away since once you launch a torpedo, the target, or anyone else in the area, is going to know where the sub is anyway.
What are you basing that assumption on? Modern torpedoes can be programmed to run a lower (i.e: harder to detect) speed until they get close to the target and/or further away from the launch platform. The loudest part of a torpedo launch is the "launch transient", i.e: the sound of the compressed air that pushes it out of the torpedo tube. Some submarines (the Seawolf class) use larger torpedo tubes that allow the torpedo to "swim" out without requiring a blast of compressed air, thus negating most of the noise of a torpedo launch.
Assuming that you are going to detect the launch is a very dangerous assumption in modern naval warfare. Your first indication of incoming "fish" is just as likely to be when they turn on their active seekers at close range and go to full speed. In that scenario you are virtually SOL and don't even have the means to retaliate.
If FDA food inspectors weren't in place, do you honestly think the food supply would be more safe?
Why do you assume that food inspectors must work for the Federal Government in order to be effective?
That company certainly wasn't interested in public safety; they only cared about their profits.
And how are those profits doing now that they've exposed like this?
If they issued the ping day and night every minute or so, the dolphins would maybe understand to stay away from the dangerous areas.
So would our enemies.
So somehow complaining about the hate spewing from the right is, itself, poisoning things?
No, trying to make the claim that Rush Limbaugh speaks for the whole of the Republican Party is poisoning things. Any neutral observer can see how that's as absurd as trying to say that Michael Moore speaks for all Democrats.
It's amazing the level that the American people have ingested the rhetoric of the right.
It's amazing how you can't help but reveal your partisan ideology. From where I sit it seems like about 30-35% of this country has "ingested" the rhetoric of the right, another 30-35% has "ingested" the rhetoric of the left (what, did you think blind allegiance to ideology is unique to the GOP?) and the rest of us are just sick of the two extremes that keep fucking it all up. Too bad our primary system and political parties are tailor made to silence moderate voices while advancing the extremist ones.
Look, the fundamental rule of the GOP is to stand there and accuse your opponent of doing exactly what you're doing fifty times more. They've done it for decades.
Right, and so have the Democrats. That's how politics are played. The only difference is that most politicians don't base an entire campaign around the idea of a "new kind of politics" and then revert to the old type after only three months in office.
I.e, when the far right fringe is okay with imprisoning Americans without charges, but has a hissy fit over voluntary national service organizations, calling them 'reeducation camps', or who think that FEMA laws are a conspiracy to implement martial law
And how about the far left fringe that shouts at the top of their lungs about "civil rights" while simultaneously trying to gut the 2nd amendment? How about the "Bush lied, people died!" crowd that make excuses for Clinton's perjury? What about all of the Democrats blaming Bush for gutting the regulatory structure while remaining silent on all those regulations that Clinton did away with? What about the Democrats that condemn the Iraq War even though a majority of them voted for it?
Which was the original intent of Obama's comments, pointing out how Rush had suddenly started saying 'unamerican things' like wanting the president to fail that he'd been claiming the left was doing for the past eight years.
No, the intent was to win a few news cycles and beat the GOP over the head. I can't really say I blame them -- that's how politics are played after all -- I just think it's a tad bit hypocritical after the campaign that he ran. I probably shouldn't be surprised -- the Obama campaign was masterful at claiming to be above politics while throwing mud and playing politics.
Rush, however, had other ideas, and it turns out he was right about who was in charge.
Rush isn't "in charge" of the right any more than Keith Olbermann is "in charge" of the left. I do find the obsession with him to be quite amusing though. I've always found him to be a bit of a jackass myself but I do get a kick out of seeing Liberals enraged to the point of trying to legislate against him. What is it about him that pisses you off so much?
Stop human beings from killing each other over nothing, obviating the need for submarines and therefore sonar?
Good luck with that.
Sort of like dropping a nuke on Denver in order to kill a few deer? Is it okay if I promise to eat everything I kill?
Well, if you go deer hunting with nukes you don't have to worry about cooking the meat afterwards ;)
Why is it such a terrible crime that the Navy consider what damage it does to its surroundings?
What makes you think they don't already or that the damage to those surroundings is more important than our ability to keep the sea lanes open in the next shooting war?
Couldn't the sonar be replaced by something less damaging? I guess water muffles radio waves, so a water radar is not a good idea. Maybe a very low frequency radar?
The problem with that theory is that you'd need such a low frequency that your wavelength would be hundreds to thousands of miles. The antenna requirements alone would make such a system impractical on a mobile basis. Some of the antennas used for ELF submarine communications systems were up to 20 miles long.
Unless you can change the laws of physics I'm afraid we'll be stuck using sonar for the foreseeable feature. If you accept that then you have to accept the fact that the Navy needs to practice with it before they need it in an actual shooting war. Sucks that it apparently harms marine life but what can you do?