I'm not overprotective. At least not by my standards (so it's subjective, but then again, what isn't). My kids are outside right now, semi-attended. Me and the misses mostly listen for noises we don't trust. I think that's sort of what any parent does.
Also, no offense meant, but your type of people disgust me because you preach a care for children but would do all you can to stifle their growth in to mature, educated and responsible adults.
You seem to be disgusted over a premature conclusion. Also, try not to be disgusted by anyone you exchanged only a few lines of text with. Regardless of what they say, really. It stifles your personal growth and prevents you from meeting interesting people.
It's gone already, I request courtesy, but don't require it. I have a strong feeling however to be polite to anyone, even in disagreement, even in anonymity. I generally distrust someone (mildly) who doesn't share that 'nerve' somewhere.
Little chance of that, I must admit. Still, maybe the whole UK thing added something new to the table. Apparently, if we don't present alternatives beyond "Not gonna happen", it's going to happen anyway.
Anonymity is _absolutely_ fine by me. I am by no means interested in anyone's true identity here. Is it too much too ask for some common courtesy however, even when you don't have to give any.
And your reply doesn't present a single refutation of an argument. First you appeal to yourself as an authority given by your "good standing" as a parent and profession, then you appeal to the tone of the retort and not the message.
I did that more because I was (indirectly) accused, It wasn't a reply on his content. And yes I appealed to the tone, for me it's pretty much a basis for any normal talk.
The UK already blocks more than just child porn with its "just for child porn, honest!" cleanfeed system.
I'm terrified actually, for this over-use/misuse.
Congratulations on your soon-to-be new arrival.
Thank you very much indeed. It's a girl, another one to worry about.:)
Internet anonymity affects you way to much on a personal level. You display anti-social behavior in what would otherwise would be an educational conversation (for me at least). I'm convinced though, that you are too a well meaning guy in real life. But here apparently, equally emotionally involved.
I'm afraid that all ideas do _not_ deserve equal review or attention,
Probably true, although that argument has been misused in the past to dismiss the other's point of view from that start.
...when the issues are so clear. Such censorship is expensive, ineffective for its most vaunted goals, and immediately prone to _enormous_ abuse to track or censor political and social speech. Wasting time in the middle debating subtleties lends legitimacy to very dangerous practices, such as deep packet inspection used to monitor speech and writing wholesale and aggregating the data into very dangerous histories on individuals and groups.
What time is wasted having that discussion? I agree with you that the extremity is a terrible thought, but you're suggesting that _any_ filtering immediately equals the thought police. Are you sure there isn't a grey area?
You're reply is the reason any debate on this subject is impossible, apparently. I'm a father of two (soon to be three), I'm an active web developer and proponent of liberties for all. Right now the internet is often a unregulated wild west with the people enforcing law having too little knowledge or power. My point is that there needs to be at least some (open) discussion. If there isn't, it will soon be a closed one. And I'm not trying to cover up anything. My conscience is very clear, thank you. See how I reply to you without insulting you back? Hope that tells something about me too.
The discussion shouldn't be ironically short, implying that 'it's so absurd we shouldn't be discussing it'. This discussion should be had extensively and without prejudice. Without sentiments like 'will someone pleeease think of the children' and 'You leave my internet ALONE!'.
The thing is, we are all in favor of some sort of censorship aren't we? I want child-porn blocked. For everyone. I want sites blocked telling people actively to be violent. The whole thing is, what are exactly the limits there, how do we establish those boundaries? And enforce them?
What's left is a discussion on the periphery. Outright dismissing any sort of censorship is naive. Outright implementing censorship is stupid.
Can they therefore derive that people who have had to take much antibiotics throughout their lives for other conditions, statistically have less cancer?
It' really the same thing with C#. I can't really remember the last serious project where I didn't need one or more NuGet packages (nuget is the main way to included and update third party packages in visual studio). Some are great, some not so much. But there is one for nearly every situation. Don't think the.net framework includes that much more in the core than java does, in my opinion it's a tad richer, but not by much.
Gather lots of knowledge on cloud development. It's a much slower moving, but very certain, change coming. Even the most hardcore nay-saying managers or admins (who will always whine about security as long as they can scare people) who want to keep it all in house are going to fold for the cheap allocation of VM's in the cloud. That's where your software will be running in about a decade (again, it's slow moving). But companies will own fewer and fewer physical servers.
As I disclaimer I'll say I like Microsoft, I develop mostly in VS. I even like Windows 8, God forbid. Don't hate me for it, it's an entirely different point than the one I am trying to make.
What I am really very curious about though is why Windows is even relevant to the DoD. Not because it can't be, but because I find it hard to believe the DoD doesn't have their own division developing and maintaining a light-weight, multi-purpose, very secure Linux distro. It would seem to make so much more sense. They certainly have the budget for it, and then some. Then again, military-wise, I am a layman and there are probably lots of considerations for them to choose a proprietary US third party like MS
Grab a large usb disk and the portable version of VirtualBox. Put your favorite snapshot on the usb drive and bam, your favorite environment with all of the software you want always with you.
Interesting question; I'm from Europe and I can pretty much guarantee you that Beck is a typical American phenomenon. I wouldn't say Americans are 'like that' or something. I like them, and, working in IT I have worked with many of them and haven't met one single asshole among them.
But the sensationalism aspect is really typically American.
I have recently discussed this with my sister in law. She's a doctor of sociology. We basically ended up with the theory that "conspiracy theorists with such depth and wide-reaching audiences that have radio or television programs" can only happen in macro-democratic-capitalistic-economies where a (relative) micro-organization still has significant funds, viewers and money. (She explains it better)
In the Netherlands a guy like Beck loses his audience, doesn't have a core/enough people to keep him funded and will disappear quietly.
Sorry for possible typos.
Slashdot Mirror
I am. And without wiggle room in your argument, I think I'll indeed settle for idiot.
I think you're an overprotective parent
I'm not overprotective. At least not by my standards (so it's subjective, but then again, what isn't). My kids are outside right now, semi-attended. Me and the misses mostly listen for noises we don't trust. I think that's sort of what any parent does.
Also, no offense meant, but your type of people disgust me because you preach a care for children but would do all you can to stifle their growth in to mature, educated and responsible adults.
You seem to be disgusted over a premature conclusion. Also, try not to be disgusted by anyone you exchanged only a few lines of text with. Regardless of what they say, really. It stifles your personal growth and prevents you from meeting interesting people.
It's gone already, I request courtesy, but don't require it. I have a strong feeling however to be polite to anyone, even in disagreement, even in anonymity. I generally distrust someone (mildly) who doesn't share that 'nerve' somewhere.
Why do ideas scare you
Of course they don't. How did you figure?
If you don't think society in general can be trusted with information
I am not worried about most people. Most people never need worry. Luckily.
Unless you have something novel to say
Little chance of that, I must admit. Still, maybe the whole UK thing added something new to the table. Apparently, if we don't present alternatives beyond "Not gonna happen", it's going to happen anyway.
Anonymity is _absolutely_ fine by me. I am by no means interested in anyone's true identity here. Is it too much too ask for some common courtesy however, even when you don't have to give any.
And your reply doesn't present a single refutation of an argument. First you appeal to yourself as an authority given by your "good standing" as a parent and profession, then you appeal to the tone of the retort and not the message.
I did that more because I was (indirectly) accused, It wasn't a reply on his content. And yes I appealed to the tone, for me it's pretty much a basis for any normal talk.
The UK already blocks more than just child porn with its "just for child porn, honest!" cleanfeed system.
I'm terrified actually, for this over-use/misuse.
Congratulations on your soon-to-be new arrival.
Thank you very much indeed. It's a girl, another one to worry about. :)
Internet anonymity affects you way to much on a personal level. You display anti-social behavior in what would otherwise would be an educational conversation (for me at least). I'm convinced though, that you are too a well meaning guy in real life. But here apparently, equally emotionally involved.
I'm afraid that all ideas do _not_ deserve equal review or attention,
Probably true, although that argument has been misused in the past to dismiss the other's point of view from that start.
...when the issues are so clear. Such censorship is expensive, ineffective for its most vaunted goals, and immediately prone to _enormous_ abuse to track or censor political and social speech. Wasting time in the middle debating subtleties lends legitimacy to very dangerous practices, such as deep packet inspection used to monitor speech and writing wholesale and aggregating the data into very dangerous histories on individuals and groups.
What time is wasted having that discussion? I agree with you that the extremity is a terrible thought, but you're suggesting that _any_ filtering immediately equals the thought police. Are you sure there isn't a grey area?
And you don't care what else gets blocked along with it
Terrified actually.
and then you'd drive your Neo-Nazis underground like Germany has
Valid point.
Apologizing for any sort of censorship is naive.
I'm just not sure. But at least we're discussing it.
You're reply is the reason any debate on this subject is impossible, apparently. I'm a father of two (soon to be three), I'm an active web developer and proponent of liberties for all. Right now the internet is often a unregulated wild west with the people enforcing law having too little knowledge or power. My point is that there needs to be at least some (open) discussion. If there isn't, it will soon be a closed one. And I'm not trying to cover up anything. My conscience is very clear, thank you. See how I reply to you without insulting you back? Hope that tells something about me too.
Did you stop reading after that exact sentence?
The discussion shouldn't be ironically short, implying that 'it's so absurd we shouldn't be discussing it'. This discussion should be had extensively and without prejudice. Without sentiments like 'will someone pleeease think of the children' and 'You leave my internet ALONE!'. The thing is, we are all in favor of some sort of censorship aren't we? I want child-porn blocked. For everyone. I want sites blocked telling people actively to be violent. The whole thing is, what are exactly the limits there, how do we establish those boundaries? And enforce them? What's left is a discussion on the periphery. Outright dismissing any sort of censorship is naive. Outright implementing censorship is stupid.
... Are here: http://www.omroepbrabant.nl/?video/82273612/Hoogtepunten+uit+de+finale+Robocup+2013+Tech+United+-+Water.aspx&action=media It's a dutch site. But just press play on the video player.
This it? http://video.pbs.org/video/2163057527/
Can they therefore derive that people who have had to take much antibiotics throughout their lives for other conditions, statistically have less cancer?
It' really the same thing with C#. I can't really remember the last serious project where I didn't need one or more NuGet packages (nuget is the main way to included and update third party packages in visual studio). Some are great, some not so much. But there is one for nearly every situation. Don't think the .net framework includes that much more in the core than java does, in my opinion it's a tad richer, but not by much.
Gather lots of knowledge on cloud development. It's a much slower moving, but very certain, change coming. Even the most hardcore nay-saying managers or admins (who will always whine about security as long as they can scare people) who want to keep it all in house are going to fold for the cheap allocation of VM's in the cloud. That's where your software will be running in about a decade (again, it's slow moving). But companies will own fewer and fewer physical servers.
"You must be a lot of fun at parties."
I recognize you 'h4rr4r'. I meet you every day. The person who won't admit to a mistake. EVER. Try it, you'll experience personal growth.
And besides; has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
As I disclaimer I'll say I like Microsoft, I develop mostly in VS. I even like Windows 8, God forbid. Don't hate me for it, it's an entirely different point than the one I am trying to make.
What I am really very curious about though is why Windows is even relevant to the DoD. Not because it can't be, but because I find it hard to believe the DoD doesn't have their own division developing and maintaining a light-weight, multi-purpose, very secure Linux distro. It would seem to make so much more sense. They certainly have the budget for it, and then some. Then again, military-wise, I am a layman and there are probably lots of considerations for them to choose a proprietary US third party like MS
How so?
Grab a large usb disk and the portable version of VirtualBox. Put your favorite snapshot on the usb drive and bam, your favorite environment with all of the software you want always with you.
Where does the power come from then!?
The government must now determine how it can make up the difference with renewable energy sources, natural gas and coal-fired plants.
I mean, really? That'll end up being 90% coal at the very least. I love sentiment driven politics, It's crappy, but waaay more interesting.
Interesting question; I'm from Europe and I can pretty much guarantee you that Beck is a typical American phenomenon. I wouldn't say Americans are 'like that' or something. I like them, and, working in IT I have worked with many of them and haven't met one single asshole among them. But the sensationalism aspect is really typically American. I have recently discussed this with my sister in law. She's a doctor of sociology. We basically ended up with the theory that "conspiracy theorists with such depth and wide-reaching audiences that have radio or television programs" can only happen in macro-democratic-capitalistic-economies where a (relative) micro-organization still has significant funds, viewers and money. (She explains it better) In the Netherlands a guy like Beck loses his audience, doesn't have a core/enough people to keep him funded and will disappear quietly. Sorry for possible typos.