Linux users may have another option in the form of a patch for that operating system's kernel. Sources estimate this patch's performance hit at less than one percent, but it comes with several caveats. At present, the patch purportedly only applies to the 64-bit version Red Hat Enterprise Linux, Upgrade 4. Customers must sign a non-disclosure agreement in order to obtain the patch...
Good thing it's just a patch, as opposed to a derived work of someone else's GPLed code. I wonder what the FSF guys would say about that. I also wonder: Red Hat, why?
Is it so hard to understand that the 5th ammendment was written in a time when we were not dealing with a group of individuals who think it's a good idea to kill Americans? ..
what's your good idea of how to deal with these issues? Let's hear your plan. If the way we are doing things is not right then what is?
Here's my plan: have the government obey the law, so that people will still have some shred of respect for the law, and respect for America itself.
When the government flagrantly disobeys the law, it sends a message that law is unimportant. That means it is ok for me, you, your local crackdealing scientologist child-pornographer, and everyone else, to do whatever seems expedient, without regard for law. Law is not worthy of respect. We create a culture of lawlessness.
In addition to being illegal, it is also contrary to the values that have have written that we hold. We create a culture of hypocrisy.
We lose respect, both abroad and for ourselves. It's a life with no honor.
If the law (i.e. the 5th Amendment) is obsolete, no longer applicable, or inconvenient, then I have good news for you: there is a legal process for correcting the error! Repeal the 5th Amendment, or otherwise pass an Amendment that says it's ok for the government to hold people without trials. Do that, and you will have corrected the illegal behavior and the hypocrisy. We'll be obeying the law, and we'll no longer be claiming that due process is something we particularly value. American will be respectable again, even if perceived as "evil" by certain bleeding hearts.
It's no big deal, is it? Surely the American people would support fixing a bug in the Constitution. Why can't we repeal or modify the Bill of Rights, or the inconvenient parts of it? Do you see some sort of problem with that?
Surely, you don't think that voters would reject that idea, in the mistaken belief that it would be a step toward a nightmare society. Heh. The very idea!
Put your ballot box where your soap box is: advocate repealing/amending the Bill of Rights. Talking about how it's a good idea to break (rather than change) the highest law of the land, just makes you look like you're in the same class as the terrorists. They break laws too. They talk about godly behavior, and then go murder people. Sound familiar?
That sounds a lot like, "It's a good thing that we have given the executive so much power, because our president is doing a great job keeping Americans safe from the Iraqi terrorists." It's ok for George's people to listen to your phone calls. But what do you do, once Hillary is elected? Suddenly you're paying for everyone's manditory healthcare insurance, farmed out to some no-bid-contract provider, and she is listening to your phone calls.
What do you do, when you justify centralization of authority, and then after that, the central authority becomes your enemy?
Principles, not examples. Safeguards, not circumstances.
What I mean is, some day, a leftwing commie hippie is going to own 66% of the media. That block will be diverse, too. One channel will be full of ads for marijuana, another full of ads for sex chat lines, and that's not counting The Satan Channel (even though it operates at a loss, subsidized by the sex chat lines).
I read as far as "W*ndoze" and then just gave up on the article.
Same here. It's pretty shocking that some people are still so immature as to run Mirco$oft W*ndoze. What is this, the 3rd grade? Kids, if you want a toy OS, you might as well just get a Nintendo.
if you accept the notion that everyone in a rich country should have good healthcare..
The premise is violated, because people disagree about what 'good healthcare' is.
Does it mean the latest patented medicines and fanciest procedures? Does it include being a client of various monopolies (e.g. AMA)?
There's also this problem: responsibility for other peoples' health, implies a right to exert power over their health. That's a mandate to ban people from doing harm to themselves. It also leads to debate and endless controversy about what is harmful, how far to take it, etc.
People will quote the special interests against it, but there's a bigger reason that dominates them all, and makes racism and the chemical company lobby fade into the background. That reason is: attitude about government.
Americans still overwhelmingly think the purpose of government is to implement whatever good ideas come up, and solve our problems. That's why this particular article is political: people are talking about the presence of useful compounds inside the plant. People talk about how harmful it is, how harmful it isn't, etc, as though the utility of the plant, or its side-effects, actually matter.
As long as you engage in discussion of the merits (or lack of merits) of the plant, in the context of whether or not it should be illegal, you lose. There will always be arguments against anything, whether its heroin or hydrogen hydroxide, that the material is harmful to the user. There's nothing on this earth that is provably safe.
The debate should always be about who owns people, not the decisions that the owner makes. Is it the government's decision on what people should ingest, or the people's decision? People, stop citing the plant's advantages, and start talking about the real political issues. Don't ask "why is this illegal?" Ask, "How is does local gardening fall under the intent of the 'interstate commerce' clause?" Ask, "Why do voters in Texas have a say in Vermont citizens' health?"
You, sir, have uncovered the vital clue revealing the presence of the secret 12th lens! How careless of Google to let this subtlety slip. They were arrogant to believe that no one would notice, but that vice is often the downfall of the mighty. They think themselves the only keen intellects, but now they've met their match in CompMD.
when it comes down to it, aren't these people actually breaking the law?
That isn't really clear. Haven't you been following the RIAA cases? It isn't unusual for innocent people (who didn't infringe any copyrights, e.g. didn't download someone's music) to get sued, and for the evidence against them to be pretty much "made up." Having experts look at the evidence, will help in these no-real-evidence cases. Sometimes, the defendant was even dead when they were alleged to commit the infringement, but I don't know if dead folk will have the sense to ask FSF for help.
Maybe your drivers are ok, but until specs are released, I'm not buying any NASA Mars rovers. The Taiwanese rovers are good enough, and Theo's team have come up with drivers for them, that we can trust.
Tricky, with the Hollywood writers strike. I assume the studios knew about this Japanese probe in advance, though, and the special effects guys were able to work up something to put in the can. Now they just have to sneak it into the stream coming from this probe.
MacOS just had a 'hot' new release, so you'd expect some sales. The 47% is the more mysterious number.
Few people actually buy Linux or BSDs in boxes, Microsoft has two pieces of crap (one of which has a support phase-out looming), and then there's.. what? Maybe while they say box sales, they really include OEM copies, so Vista is in there. Who else sells OSes in boxes these days? The figure probably includes something weird, like Symbian or something.
In real life, scarcity is real. The rules that enforce it, were created by no one. You lack your truck after it is stolen, because that's how the universe works. We blame God, except he's untouchable.
In the game, scarcity is fake and arbitrary. The rules that enforce it, were created by the game designers. They could have just as easily written it so that whenever someone steals your virtual furniture, you still have it. Blame God again, except God has a name and you can point at him.
Blame the rulemakers. I think the game designers are a party to this "crime".
But you chose to play the game; nobody chose to play in life. Thus, the victim also shares some of the blame, when this happens inside a game.
Slashdot Mirror
Good thing it's just a patch, as opposed to a derived work of someone else's GPLed code. I wonder what the FSF guys would say about that. I also wonder: Red Hat, why?
Whoa. What does that have to do with anything? Do these damages preempt later damage claims?
Here's my plan: have the government obey the law, so that people will still have some shred of respect for the law, and respect for America itself.
When the government flagrantly disobeys the law, it sends a message that law is unimportant. That means it is ok for me, you, your local crackdealing scientologist child-pornographer, and everyone else, to do whatever seems expedient, without regard for law. Law is not worthy of respect. We create a culture of lawlessness.
In addition to being illegal, it is also contrary to the values that have have written that we hold. We create a culture of hypocrisy.
We lose respect, both abroad and for ourselves. It's a life with no honor.
If the law (i.e. the 5th Amendment) is obsolete, no longer applicable, or inconvenient, then I have good news for you: there is a legal process for correcting the error! Repeal the 5th Amendment, or otherwise pass an Amendment that says it's ok for the government to hold people without trials. Do that, and you will have corrected the illegal behavior and the hypocrisy. We'll be obeying the law, and we'll no longer be claiming that due process is something we particularly value. American will be respectable again, even if perceived as "evil" by certain bleeding hearts.
It's no big deal, is it? Surely the American people would support fixing a bug in the Constitution. Why can't we repeal or modify the Bill of Rights, or the inconvenient parts of it? Do you see some sort of problem with that?
Surely, you don't think that voters would reject that idea, in the mistaken belief that it would be a step toward a nightmare society. Heh. The very idea!
Put your ballot box where your soap box is: advocate repealing/amending the Bill of Rights. Talking about how it's a good idea to break (rather than change) the highest law of the land, just makes you look like you're in the same class as the terrorists. They break laws too. They talk about godly behavior, and then go murder people. Sound familiar?
That sounds a lot like, "It's a good thing that we have given the executive so much power, because our president is doing a great job keeping Americans safe from the Iraqi terrorists." It's ok for George's people to listen to your phone calls. But what do you do, once Hillary is elected? Suddenly you're paying for everyone's manditory healthcare insurance, farmed out to some no-bid-contract provider, and she is listening to your phone calls.
What do you do, when you justify centralization of authority, and then after that, the central authority becomes your enemy?
Principles, not examples. Safeguards, not circumstances.
What I mean is, some day, a leftwing commie hippie is going to own 66% of the media. That block will be diverse, too. One channel will be full of ads for marijuana, another full of ads for sex chat lines, and that's not counting The Satan Channel (even though it operates at a loss, subsidized by the sex chat lines).
Just wondering: what does SPAM stand for? Sudden Plethora of Awesome Mail?
I don't think "candidate" means what you think it means.
Unemployed thanks to the heartless advance of technology. How sad.
The premise is violated, because people disagree about what 'good healthcare' is.
Does it mean the latest patented medicines and fanciest procedures? Does it include being a client of various monopolies (e.g. AMA)?
There's also this problem: responsibility for other peoples' health, implies a right to exert power over their health. That's a mandate to ban people from doing harm to themselves. It also leads to debate and endless controversy about what is harmful, how far to take it, etc.
People will quote the special interests against it, but there's a bigger reason that dominates them all, and makes racism and the chemical company lobby fade into the background. That reason is: attitude about government.
Americans still overwhelmingly think the purpose of government is to implement whatever good ideas come up, and solve our problems. That's why this particular article is political: people are talking about the presence of useful compounds inside the plant. People talk about how harmful it is, how harmful it isn't, etc, as though the utility of the plant, or its side-effects, actually matter.
As long as you engage in discussion of the merits (or lack of merits) of the plant, in the context of whether or not it should be illegal, you lose. There will always be arguments against anything, whether its heroin or hydrogen hydroxide, that the material is harmful to the user. There's nothing on this earth that is provably safe.
The debate should always be about who owns people, not the decisions that the owner makes. Is it the government's decision on what people should ingest, or the people's decision? People, stop citing the plant's advantages, and start talking about the real political issues. Don't ask "why is this illegal?" Ask, "How is does local gardening fall under the intent of the 'interstate commerce' clause?" Ask, "Why do voters in Texas have a say in Vermont citizens' health?"
We can always invade someone and take their bandwidth.
Because they know the secret passphrases. Wonder how they got 'em.
You, sir, have uncovered the vital clue revealing the presence of the secret 12th lens! How careless of Google to let this subtlety slip. They were arrogant to believe that no one would notice, but that vice is often the downfall of the mighty. They think themselves the only keen intellects, but now they've met their match in CompMD.
That isn't really clear. Haven't you been following the RIAA cases? It isn't unusual for innocent people (who didn't infringe any copyrights, e.g. didn't download someone's music) to get sued, and for the evidence against them to be pretty much "made up." Having experts look at the evidence, will help in these no-real-evidence cases. Sometimes, the defendant was even dead when they were alleged to commit the infringement, but I don't know if dead folk will have the sense to ask FSF for help.
Faster Gentoo installs. And a longer penis.
Maybe your drivers are ok, but until specs are released, I'm not buying any NASA Mars rovers. The Taiwanese rovers are good enough, and Theo's team have come up with drivers for them, that we can trust.
s/technology/product/
Tricky, with the Hollywood writers strike. I assume the studios knew about this Japanese probe in advance, though, and the special effects guys were able to work up something to put in the can. Now they just have to sneak it into the stream coming from this probe.
You bastard.
MacOS just had a 'hot' new release, so you'd expect some sales. The 47% is the more mysterious number.
Few people actually buy Linux or BSDs in boxes, Microsoft has two pieces of crap (one of which has a support phase-out looming), and then there's .. what? Maybe while they say box sales, they really include OEM copies, so Vista is in there. Who else sells OSes in boxes these days? The figure probably includes something weird, like Symbian or something.
In real life, scarcity is real. The rules that enforce it, were created by no one. You lack your truck after it is stolen, because that's how the universe works. We blame God, except he's untouchable.
In the game, scarcity is fake and arbitrary. The rules that enforce it, were created by the game designers. They could have just as easily written it so that whenever someone steals your virtual furniture, you still have it. Blame God again, except God has a name and you can point at him.
Blame the rulemakers. I think the game designers are a party to this "crime".
But you chose to play the game; nobody chose to play in life. Thus, the victim also shares some of the blame, when this happens inside a game.
*sigh* This will eventually result in a new stupid meme. Apple will come out with a product, and Slashdotters will ask, "But does it run gPhone?"