I was arguing that appropriate was not the same as legally acceptable.
And I was arguing to the larger point that posting a phone number in one public. forum does not give you any privacy or reason to expect that phone number NOT to be posted to another forum.
And am I non-racist if I thought a kike was a derogatory name for a German?
And Renopo was a shell script, not a virus, that was fixed with a security update from 2004: http://www.lindqvist.com/index.php?ID=1735 And, no, there are still no viruses for OS X. But good luck trying!
Actually, it is ok to tell fart jokes in math class. Appropriate, maybe not. But it is okay, and doesn't matter what public place it is. Or who that public is.
And you have no reason to expect privacy in that no one will retell your fart joke elsewhere either.
With each copy of Windows you get dozens of holes that not everyone knows exist or how to fix them if they did exist. See yesterday's cricital updates...
What OS has zero spyware/virus/worms/etc targetting it?
See my sig.
It is 100% BillG/MS's fault that a user CAN download a virus from a website, and get infected from it. Yes, the hackers must assume some responsibility. But MS also holds a huge responsiblilty because they let these things happen so easily for so long. Go download a script kiddie kit and see how easy it is to write one. It's utterly pathetic.
There are several OSes out there that this can't happen.
Windows problems are so bad that instead of being able to fix the problem, they've tried to fix the symptom and MS bought an antivirus company! That's utterly retarded, and there's no excuse for them to NOT be able to fix the problem instead of the symptom.
Wait, you posted a piece of information in a public place, and you think it's not ok for someone in that public place to take it to another public place?
Why do you think you have any right to privacy in a public place, regardless of what the information is? Do you expect no one to be able to call you when your number is in a phone book?
CNet used a Google executive to show that privacy cannot be expected when that information has been shared in a public place before, and they got that information from Google. Frankly, I think they made their point perfectly. Once upon a time, I googled my father. I got his old and new phone numbers, old and new address and map links to them. I then told him not to make any enemies.
The real point of the Cnet article is this: make sure you want your private information shared publicly or don't give it out to anyone.
Frankly, all of your questions can be answered very simply.
Use Mac OS X Server. I know it can do all those things, via the GUI, because I get paid to do them. And they're pretty damn simple. And cheap to boot: $1000 for the server sw and an older G4 is about all you need.
The Fine Article was about cooling the earth. I stopped considering it a real idea when I saw the price tag. You should have too.
However, you were arguing against people who were saying all we need to do is reduce CO2 by arguing against The Fine Article's premise. Hence, the strawman comment.
I think it's a case of: Same side of the argument, different points of view.
No one here (that I've seen) is arguing for cooling down the earth.
They're just arguing to stop warming it up so quickly.
A previous poster had a great and simple list of facts: 1.There is no doubt adding large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere will tend to raise temperatures. 2. There is no doubt that we are adding large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. 3.There is no doubt that temperatures are rising.
We just need to reduce the amount of CO2 we're dumping into the atmosphere so that temperatures don't rise AS MUCH as they are now.
Slashdot Mirror
Frankly, you've improperly extended my argument.
I was arguing that appropriate was not the same as legally acceptable.
And I was arguing to the larger point that posting a phone number in one public. forum does not give you any privacy or reason to expect that phone number NOT to be posted to another forum.
And am I non-racist if I thought a kike was a derogatory name for a German?
Let me get this straight.
You used dictionary.com to find out a technical definition of an acronym and came up short? Wow, apparently you couldn't get the MCSE either.
Esperanto & Mac.Simpsons are not OS X viruses, per f-secure:
http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/esperant.shtml
http://www.f-secure.com/v-descs/macsimps.shtml
So you're wrong again there. Maybe if you could provide an actual link. You might need directions.
And Renopo was a shell script, not a virus, that was fixed with a security update from 2004:
http://www.lindqvist.com/index.php?ID=1735
And, no, there are still no viruses for OS X. But good luck trying!
Actually, it is ok to tell fart jokes in math class. Appropriate, maybe not. But it is okay, and doesn't matter what public place it is. Or who that public is.
And you have no reason to expect privacy in that no one will retell your fart joke elsewhere either.
Renopo is, again, a script that needs admin access to run. This principle would work on any OS.
Espranto and Mac.Simpsons were viruses for OS 9, from about 5 years ago.
Try checking your facts next time.
And MAC stands for Media Access Control. But you're probably a Minesweeper Consultant and Solitaire Expert and wouldn't understand that.
Interestingly, I bet you had virus protection on the entire time. Because you had to. Thanks for proving my point!
Show me a link to an actual virus, trojan, worm, malware.
Those links are for security issues that have NEVER been actually exploited.
As for the MP3Virus.gen, it was a script that required admin access. This is a 'security hole' on every OS ever created.
And it's not MAC, it's Mac. And the company is called Apple. Know what you're talking about before you reply.
With each copy of Windows you get dozens of holes that not everyone knows exist or how to fix them if they did exist. See yesterday's cricital updates...
What OS has zero spyware/virus/worms/etc targetting it?
See my sig.
It is written on ICQ's website. It took all of 5 seconds to find that. Thus, it's available for use in any other context.
Pulbic information can be used in any other public context. If you don't want it public, then don't let it be public!
It is 100% BillG/MS's fault that a user CAN download a virus from a website, and get infected from it. Yes, the hackers must assume some responsibility. But MS also holds a huge responsiblilty because they let these things happen so easily for so long. Go download a script kiddie kit and see how easy it is to write one. It's utterly pathetic.
There are several OSes out there that this can't happen.
Windows problems are so bad that instead of being able to fix the problem, they've tried to fix the symptom and MS bought an antivirus company! That's utterly retarded, and there's no excuse for them to NOT be able to fix the problem instead of the symptom.
Wait, you posted a piece of information in a public place, and you think it's not ok for someone in that public place to take it to another public place?
Why do you think you have any right to privacy in a public place, regardless of what the information is? Do you expect no one to be able to call you when your number is in a phone book?
CNet used a Google executive to show that privacy cannot be expected when that information has been shared in a public place before, and they got that information from Google. Frankly, I think they made their point perfectly. Once upon a time, I googled my father. I got his old and new phone numbers, old and new address and map links to them. I then told him not to make any enemies.
The real point of the Cnet article is this: make sure you want your private information shared publicly or don't give it out to anyone.
He didn't create it, but his company/OS made it really easy to send it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zombie_computer
It couldn't be China doubling their oil usage every few years or so.
e tail.asp
http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.21078/pub_d
cost of BOMB>>>cost of bb gun
And the bacteria option provides so many more options: kick through wall, drive through wall, laser through wall, etc.
Try this:
http://hula-project.org/
Well, when they can adapt aerobic bacteria, then I guess all offensive/defensive metal is FUBAR.
It's not a silly notion.
They're talking about them being rust monsters. And that could seriously weaken any structure.
A high level fly over that sprays bacteria on a steel structure. Two months later, shoot holes in it using a bb gun.
It's not that unreasonable. Now, we'll have to start putting antibacterial compounds on our metal buildings/ships/guns/etc.
Apparently, their marketing department sucks worse than the GP thought!!
I think you can sum it up succinctly like this:
Politicians == Terrorists
They're just threatening (slightly) different freedoms.
Here's one:
a riOnAcid.dmg
http://www.aoc.nrao.edu/~bwaters/projects/mac/Saf
That's how it's (almost) always been, and probably how it will (almost) always be.
Citrix servers are NOT boxen.
You're fired and no you can't take the 'image' collection with you!
Frankly, all of your questions can be answered very simply.
Use Mac OS X Server. I know it can do all those things, via the GUI, because I get paid to do them. And they're pretty damn simple. And cheap to boot: $1000 for the server sw and an older G4 is about all you need.
For an example, try this.
"has" and "announced" are two very different meaning words.
Try to find a shipping date on the 970FX chips. See if the PentiumM is either cooler or faster by then.
The Fine Article was about cooling the earth. I stopped considering it a real idea when I saw the price tag. You should have too.
However, you were arguing against people who were saying all we need to do is reduce CO2 by arguing against The Fine Article's premise. Hence, the strawman comment.
I think it's a case of: Same side of the argument, different points of view.
I don't think an AC will get a beer...
Bit of a strawman arugment, eh?
No one here (that I've seen) is arguing for cooling down the earth.
They're just arguing to stop warming it up so quickly.
A previous poster had a great and simple list of facts:
1.There is no doubt adding large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere will tend to raise temperatures.
2. There is no doubt that we are adding large amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere.
3.There is no doubt that temperatures are rising.
We just need to reduce the amount of CO2 we're dumping into the atmosphere so that temperatures don't rise AS MUCH as they are now.