The question is: Where does vigilance end and paranoia begin?
The first is important, yes. It allows us to regulate how much we are regulated for the sake of freedom.
However, once you pass the one state into the other, it turns from a responsible vigilance to a reactionary panic, where the only true belief becomes "Only the fittest survive." You begin suspecting your neighbors for either plotting against you or simply not caring, and letting others plot against you.
More importantly, freedom of speech was designed to prevent the need for anonymity; there's a reason I have never made a single post on this forum outside this login, and that's because I believe freedom of speech requires one to be willing to divulge who they are.
To remain anonymous is silly, I won't argue that I have done some things in my past that are in shades of grey. However, I am also willing to accept the consequences of those actions, or I never would have done them. THIS is the nature of responsibility, and hiding who I am is simply trying to duck the consequences of my actions... to prevent the ability to be responsible.
Now, just about everyone I encounter will generally trust me after a ten-minute conversation. I don't know why exactly, other than the above. I treat everyone with the respect of someone I've met a few times and found to be pleasant company. Usually, that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Cops may pull me over, but they have never given me the "domineering attitude," and often have let me off the hook because I strike a good chord with them... I simply treat "Officer Smith" as "My buddy Joe Smith who just happens to be at work right now..." despite the fact that I don't know Joe from Adam.
The thing that makes cops irritable and suspicious is when someone grumbles or cops an attitude, or brazenly state that they are not going to cooperate. Wouldn't you get grumpy with someone like that if they were being abrasive with you?
Police officers stand outside a political rally and ask everyone to identify themselves, and run all the names of people they identify through the computer.
*chuckle* Oh, really? And you're telling me that there's never oppositely-affiliated people going to those rallies, if for just the fun of laughing about it to their buddies later?
Police officers wait outside a time share vacation sales meeting where you have to have a minimum family income to attend.
In both cases, you turn this into a case where police spend (or more likely waste) time polling people. For what purpose? A policeman's job is simply to make his jurisdiction a safer place to be.
Police forces DO have a limited amount of money to spend on patrolling, seeking out existing criminals, and looking for suspicious activity.
They can't afford to waste money profiling a segment of the population that are simply attending a legally-occurring event, except in the case of complaints from neighbors or the suspected presence of someone who might do something harmful.
And asking each person their name would be rather time(and money)-consuming, and likely generate more than just a few angry calls to the local precinct.
Since when was giving an officer your name a bad thing? To anyone who does business, spreading your name around is actually pretty everyday stuff. If it's part of a policeman's procedure, well, being polite rarely gets a negative response.
I'd give him a business card, and tell him to call me when he needs a computer fixed. If he looks me up, he'll just find a lot of satisfied customers.:D
What I don't understand is why people assume the police are made up of thugs who want to dominate people... most policemen are simply your average guy who's trying to do their job, and pulling their hair out when they get no respect for it. Their pay isn't all that incredible. They likely have families that they want to keep safe. And many times, their lives depend on a piece of plastic that they wear about their bodies... and the training they received. So do they really deserve to be snubbed when all they want is to be sure you're not someone they're going to have to risk their lives against?
More importantly, if you act like an asshole, expect to be suspected of something. Manners go hand in hand with honesty. You don't have to tell him what your political affiliation or your annual household income is. Just something that you would likely give to an attractive stranger in any case.;)
"Linux is a leprosy; and is having a deleterious effect on the U.S. IT industry because it is steadily depreciating the value of the software industry sector."
I think I read a phrase once that fit quite nicely... what was it again?
I've seen a number of people here already saying that the code is too small to be any form of encryption.
What if the two outer letters indicated a mixing of sorts?
Instead of D.O.U.O.S.V.A.V.V.M
The D and M could possibly expand the letters to two-letter combos...
DO DU DO DS DV DA DV DV MO MU MO MS MV MA MV MV
Now, you have 16 possible letter combinations instead of eight... potentially more ways to integrate them into a new cypher of some kind.
Another possibility is that the OUOSVAVV isn't the message... it could be the key, and maybe D and M could be a second part of the key.
Perhaps the sculptor used those letters in conjunction with the other inscription ("Et in arcadia ego") in some odd fashion to produce a workable plaintext. Just because the inscription is in plaintext, doesn't mean it isn't an encrypted form of OTHER plaintext... it's just much more improbable....or maybe I'm just babbling now.
Of COURSE there will be! Unfortunately, they will have much less freedom for causing damage, unless you make the sad mistake of running the emulator as root... in which case, I will have no pity for you.;)
I think it was Bill Gates who once said something like:
"I would actually prefer people pirate our software than the other guys software."
Pirated or legal, that keeps Windows on the desktop, and it keeps the users' knowledgebase firmly rooted in MS products... thus it keeps them in control.
Either that, or the PETA found out, and decided to pay the company a midnight visit. I guess they didn't want the pigeons to develop beak tunnel syndrome.
Microsoft will eventually abandon the Windows 9X platform, so they might as well release the source code or the full API list so some other company or organization can take it over.
What, and get trounced by their own legacy products? MS is many things, quite a few of which I can't name where there's the possibility of children reading, but "Stupid" isn't really among them.
Actually, it wasn't meant to be funny... it was a thought of less-bulky protective gear that could work for non-combative situations.
I will grant you this; this armor would not protect against impact. It would protect against side effects of that impact, such as protrusions in a tree, or the ever-present danger of scraping when one falls onto pavement.
This could also have some very valuable applications where protective garmentation for sports are required... If bullets can't penetrate the armor, it would easily protect against hockey sticks and pucks, collisions with trees, and, of course, smacking pavement at a high velocity.
Never mind how a jacket of the stuff would affect the school bully...;)
It ain't a black box until it's virtually indestructable.
At that point, it would double as a bulletproof shield.
All joking aside, if you build one of these into police and soldiers' bulletproof vests, you will have a new way to keep men alive out there. (Or, in a post-battle field, find those bodies that are still alive)
I hope the system doesn't force one to stay on the road... sometimes, in order to exit a freeway, you have to go over rumble strips, or those reflectors on the side of a road.
Oh well, the universal competition between the engineers and the universe continues... the Universe is still winning...
Imitation... that's a BAD thing?
on
Red Hat Recap
·
· Score: 1
"Most open source is imitation," Carey says. "Linux is an imitation of an operating system. If these [Linux] companies are going to create a price point that is significant enough that they are approaching the same pricing model as the innovation premium, why pay a premium for imitation when I can pay a premium and get innovation?"
Nice, but here's where said argument breaks down...
Pepsi is imitation of Coke... and yet while Coke's #1, Pepsi is enjoying a pretty good bottom line as well as Coke's #1 competitor. Why is this?
Simple... they are both colas, but there are two kinds of people out there... those who want Coke, and those who don't. Pepsi takes an opposing angle against Coke specifically because that'll catch those who don't want Coke.
The same can be said for Windows/Linux. There are two kinds of people out there... those that want to use Windows, and those who don't. (There's the third group, those who don't but don't have a choice... that's where Linux will be picking up the slack within a couple years, but I digress)
Linux's primary strategy is simple... be enough like Windows to compete in the category, but opposite in enough ways to claim all those who don't want Windows. The opposite angle is the Open Source philosophy... and it's provides (now) a strong marketing advantage, just like the "do want Windows" crowd loves the ability to contact MS to get support, the "don't wants" loves the ability to get support from just about anyone who's done work in the Linux operating system (or the freedom to do their own damn tech support)
It's all perspective to the people. Imitation's not bad, as long as marketable differentiation still exists.
When lawyers (service providers, not producers) get ahold of a large chunk of cash and then use it to buy luxuries (and don't support the development of core economic industries), the total supply of value shrinks.
Question, then... what is used to make those luxuries?
Fancy cars still need lots of metals, plastics, and fabric to be made. Caviar supports the fishing industry. Viagra and other "non-essential" drugs still support the same pharmaceutical companies that offer life-saving drugs. In all cases, they allow said industries to support the salaries and wages of all their workers.
Nothing exists in a vacuum, and money deposited in one industry will not stay there... by definition, it has to circulate.
Re:Presentation Problem to be solved?
on
CSS for the LDP?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Well, I have one friend who spent time learning all he could about CSS to "handicap-enable" his web browser.
You see, he has difficulty seeing, so he needs the web browser to default to larger fonts, so here comes CSS, which modifies websites to be easily visible to him.
This is an example of a useful purpose to CSS that has nothing to do with "beautifying" a site.
However, it doesn't need to be cookies; like I said, that was simplistic. It could just as easily be some extra free time before bed, or a new bike... simply put, when he's good, he gets rewarded based on what he values.
Rewards need not be limited to chemical recombinants purposefully arranged for pleasant consumption into the digestive system.;)
Punishments, by the way, doesn't need to be limited to corporal punishment, either. There are ways to make one feel bad without actually harming them. See what happens if you take the XBox for a couple of days...
Slashdot Mirror
You scare me...
Wait... I didn't even hesitate when reading that...
*shudder* Mommy?
Well, from what had leaked so far, I really don't think I've heard of anything involving GPL code.
I mean, after all, whether the typical programmers read it or not, it seems like someone would have caught on, if there was any...
Preferably in single file...
*sigh* Therein lies the problem.
The question is: Where does vigilance end and paranoia begin?
The first is important, yes. It allows us to regulate how much we are regulated for the sake of freedom.
However, once you pass the one state into the other, it turns from a responsible vigilance to a reactionary panic, where the only true belief becomes "Only the fittest survive." You begin suspecting your neighbors for either plotting against you or simply not caring, and letting others plot against you.
More importantly, freedom of speech was designed to prevent the need for anonymity; there's a reason I have never made a single post on this forum outside this login, and that's because I believe freedom of speech requires one to be willing to divulge who they are.
To remain anonymous is silly, I won't argue that I have done some things in my past that are in shades of grey. However, I am also willing to accept the consequences of those actions, or I never would have done them. THIS is the nature of responsibility, and hiding who I am is simply trying to duck the consequences of my actions... to prevent the ability to be responsible.
Now, just about everyone I encounter will generally trust me after a ten-minute conversation. I don't know why exactly, other than the above. I treat everyone with the respect of someone I've met a few times and found to be pleasant company. Usually, that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Cops may pull me over, but they have never given me the "domineering attitude," and often have let me off the hook because I strike a good chord with them... I simply treat "Officer Smith" as "My buddy Joe Smith who just happens to be at work right now..." despite the fact that I don't know Joe from Adam.
The thing that makes cops irritable and suspicious is when someone grumbles or cops an attitude, or brazenly state that they are not going to cooperate. Wouldn't you get grumpy with someone like that if they were being abrasive with you?
Police officers stand outside a political rally and ask everyone to identify themselves, and run all the names of people they identify through the computer.
*chuckle* Oh, really? And you're telling me that there's never oppositely-affiliated people going to those rallies, if for just the fun of laughing about it to their buddies later?
Police officers wait outside a time share vacation sales meeting where you have to have a minimum family income to attend.
In both cases, you turn this into a case where police spend (or more likely waste) time polling people. For what purpose? A policeman's job is simply to make his jurisdiction a safer place to be.
Police forces DO have a limited amount of money to spend on patrolling, seeking out existing criminals, and looking for suspicious activity.
They can't afford to waste money profiling a segment of the population that are simply attending a legally-occurring event, except in the case of complaints from neighbors or the suspected presence of someone who might do something harmful.
And asking each person their name would be rather time(and money)-consuming, and likely generate more than just a few angry calls to the local precinct.
Since when was giving an officer your name a bad thing? To anyone who does business, spreading your name around is actually pretty everyday stuff. If it's part of a policeman's procedure, well, being polite rarely gets a negative response.
:D
;)
I'd give him a business card, and tell him to call me when he needs a computer fixed. If he looks me up, he'll just find a lot of satisfied customers.
What I don't understand is why people assume the police are made up of thugs who want to dominate people... most policemen are simply your average guy who's trying to do their job, and pulling their hair out when they get no respect for it. Their pay isn't all that incredible. They likely have families that they want to keep safe. And many times, their lives depend on a piece of plastic that they wear about their bodies... and the training they received. So do they really deserve to be snubbed when all they want is to be sure you're not someone they're going to have to risk their lives against?
More importantly, if you act like an asshole, expect to be suspected of something. Manners go hand in hand with honesty. You don't have to tell him what your political affiliation or your annual household income is. Just something that you would likely give to an attractive stranger in any case.
*shrug* maybe I'm missing something.
Some of us are spelling-impaired, you insensitive clod!
That's a damned lie!
;)
Not quite. There's lies, damned lies, and... well, I think I shall leave the rest of this phrase for individual research.
Gotta love Mark Twain!
"Linux is a leprosy; and is having a deleterious effect on the U.S. IT industry because it is steadily depreciating the value of the software industry sector."
I think I read a phrase once that fit quite nicely... what was it again?
Oh, yeah, that's it...
"Tough. Adapt or die."
On the other hand, the Power Glove will probably always be a bad idea.
Well, any glove on the other hand is a bad idea, duh!
*ducks and runs*
I think the point that was being made is that a lot of stupid people who wield MBAs use those certifications as proof that they're right.
In other words, stupid people made dumber by arrogance.
I've seen a number of people here already saying that the code is too small to be any form of encryption.
...or maybe I'm just babbling now.
What if the two outer letters indicated a mixing of sorts?
Instead of D.O.U.O.S.V.A.V.V.M
The D and M could possibly expand the letters to two-letter combos...
DO DU DO DS DV DA DV DV
MO MU MO MS MV MA MV MV
Now, you have 16 possible letter combinations instead of eight... potentially more ways to integrate them into a new cypher of some kind.
Another possibility is that the OUOSVAVV isn't the message... it could be the key, and maybe D and M could be a second part of the key.
Perhaps the sculptor used those letters in conjunction with the other inscription ("Et in arcadia ego") in some odd fashion to produce a workable plaintext. Just because the inscription is in plaintext, doesn't mean it isn't an encrypted form of OTHER plaintext... it's just much more improbable.
Of COURSE there will be! Unfortunately, they will have much less freedom for causing damage, unless you make the sad mistake of running the emulator as root... in which case, I will have no pity for you. ;)
I think it was Bill Gates who once said something like:
"I would actually prefer people pirate our software than the other guys software."
Pirated or legal, that keeps Windows on the desktop, and it keeps the users' knowledgebase firmly rooted in MS products... thus it keeps them in control.
Either that, or the PETA found out, and decided to pay the company a midnight visit. I guess they didn't want the pigeons to develop beak tunnel syndrome.
Microsoft will eventually abandon the Windows 9X platform, so they might as well release the source code or the full API list so some other company or organization can take it over.
What, and get trounced by their own legacy products? MS is many things, quite a few of which I can't name where there's the possibility of children reading, but "Stupid" isn't really among them.
cp? *shrug* dd? Meh.
/dev/hda | bzip2 > Image.bz2
cat's my tool of choice.
cat
Image-based Backup and compression, without the hefty expense. Add in gpg to that chain, and it's encrypted, too.
__
Okay, back on-topic.
1: OpenOffice.org
http://www.openoffice.org
2: Winamp
http://www.winamp.com
3: Mozilla
http://www.mozilla.org
4: SpywareBlaster and SpywareGuard
http://www.javacoolsoftware.com
5: Spybot Search & Destroy
http://www.safer-networking.org
6: Trillian
http://www.trillian.cc
7: 7-Zip
http://www.7-zip.org
8: Really Slick Screensavers
http://www.reallyslick.com
9: X-Setup
http://www.xteq.com
10: BigFix
http://www.bigfix.com
I know number 4 is two proggies, but I figure that they're closely related enough to be considered one solution.
Actually, it wasn't meant to be funny... it was a thought of less-bulky protective gear that could work for non-combative situations.
I will grant you this; this armor would not protect against impact. It would protect against side effects of that impact, such as protrusions in a tree, or the ever-present danger of scraping when one falls onto pavement.
This could also have some very valuable applications where protective garmentation for sports are required... If bullets can't penetrate the armor, it would easily protect against hockey sticks and pucks, collisions with trees, and, of course, smacking pavement at a high velocity.
;)
Never mind how a jacket of the stuff would affect the school bully...
It ain't a black box until it's virtually indestructable.
At that point, it would double as a bulletproof shield.
All joking aside, if you build one of these into police and soldiers' bulletproof vests, you will have a new way to keep men alive out there. (Or, in a post-battle field, find those bodies that are still alive)
I hope the system doesn't force one to stay on the road... sometimes, in order to exit a freeway, you have to go over rumble strips, or those reflectors on the side of a road.
Oh well, the universal competition between the engineers and the universe continues... the Universe is still winning...
"Most open source is imitation," Carey says. "Linux is an imitation of an operating system. If these [Linux] companies are going to create a price point that is significant enough that they are approaching the same pricing model as the innovation premium, why pay a premium for imitation when I can pay a premium and get innovation?"
Nice, but here's where said argument breaks down...
Pepsi is imitation of Coke... and yet while Coke's #1, Pepsi is enjoying a pretty good bottom line as well as Coke's #1 competitor. Why is this?
Simple... they are both colas, but there are two kinds of people out there... those who want Coke, and those who don't. Pepsi takes an opposing angle against Coke specifically because that'll catch those who don't want Coke.
The same can be said for Windows/Linux. There are two kinds of people out there... those that want to use Windows, and those who don't. (There's the third group, those who don't but don't have a choice... that's where Linux will be picking up the slack within a couple years, but I digress)
Linux's primary strategy is simple... be enough like Windows to compete in the category, but opposite in enough ways to claim all those who don't want Windows. The opposite angle is the Open Source philosophy... and it's provides (now) a strong marketing advantage, just like the "do want Windows" crowd loves the ability to contact MS to get support, the "don't wants" loves the ability to get support from just about anyone who's done work in the Linux operating system (or the freedom to do their own damn tech support)
It's all perspective to the people. Imitation's not bad, as long as marketable differentiation still exists.
When lawyers (service providers, not producers) get ahold of a large chunk of cash and then use it to buy luxuries (and don't support the development of core economic industries), the total supply of value shrinks.
Question, then... what is used to make those luxuries?
Fancy cars still need lots of metals, plastics, and fabric to be made. Caviar supports the fishing industry. Viagra and other "non-essential" drugs still support the same pharmaceutical companies that offer life-saving drugs. In all cases, they allow said industries to support the salaries and wages of all their workers.
Nothing exists in a vacuum, and money deposited in one industry will not stay there... by definition, it has to circulate.
Well, I have one friend who spent time learning all he could about CSS to "handicap-enable" his web browser.
You see, he has difficulty seeing, so he needs the web browser to default to larger fonts, so here comes CSS, which modifies websites to be easily visible to him.
This is an example of a useful purpose to CSS that has nothing to do with "beautifying" a site.
*lol* Good point.
;)
However, it doesn't need to be cookies; like I said, that was simplistic. It could just as easily be some extra free time before bed, or a new bike... simply put, when he's good, he gets rewarded based on what he values.
Rewards need not be limited to chemical recombinants purposefully arranged for pleasant consumption into the digestive system.
Punishments, by the way, doesn't need to be limited to corporal punishment, either. There are ways to make one feel bad without actually harming them. See what happens if you take the XBox for a couple of days...