Generally, I avoid these debates; I voted already, so whatever. But, why aren't Obama's associations important? (I am asking respectfully; an irony here to be sure):)
Look, I don't care that Obama and Ayers ended up on the same committee per se. That happens. But (and I could be wrong here), wasn't it more than one council? And didn't they spend quite a bit of time together voluntarily?
More importantly, Obama viewed and wrote that Wright was his mentor and guide. Wright disturbs me; not because I'm racist (I have minority friends). Anyone who calls me racist because I'm white tends to disturb me. I could deal with that, but Wright wants to take it much further and oppress me. He rejects any view of a God that likes white people. This sounds racist to me, but maybe I'm just deceived about the definition of racism. Obama called this man his mentor? I'm not sure I want someone who looked up to Wright for decades to be leading this country. Just not sure I want to encourage reverse discrimination against myself (or anyone else for that matter). The Bible strongly condemns discrimination.
In the end, taken separately and in small bites, neither association is necessarily a big deal, but together in the quantities in which Obama indulged himself in these relationships with extremists makes this a worthwhile subject to consider.
Um.... In the 1890's Germany was known as the most scientific nation on earth. They knew it and flaunted it as well. Ergo, a fairly arrogant nation. Take that backdrop and consider that most westernized countries were extremely nationalistic (to a fault) in first 40 years of the 20th century. We'll get back to that.
Enter, WW1 and the attempt to initiate the second Reich. It failed.
One of the reasons that Hitler succeeded as far as he did was through the intense nationalism of other countries. It led to many good people viewing Hitler's message of nationalism as a good thing especially when compared to the rise of Communism. They saw Hitler's nationalism blending with Italy's fascism and considered Germany to be a great buffer zone against Russia.
Now, the economic situation helped Hitler rise to power, but it most certainly was not the only nor the primary reason. If it was, how do you explain the attempt at initiating a Third Reich?
The truth is that Hitler rose primarily based on his oratorical skills and intuitive understanding of people. He was truly a masterful politician.
Anyway, are you suggesting that the US is trying to economically expand its borders via monetary investment (and consequently democracy)? How is that aggression? Go ask these countries if they want America to take its money and go home. Investment typically == improved lifestyles. (Not always, I'm not naive.) your suggestion if I understand it is ludicrous. Russia is a threat; though I'm certainly not looking to see war. It's quite clear that reporters investigating the Kremlin are dying. It's quite clear that the current leader is Putin's puppet.
There's no conspiracy theory here. The facts stand for themselves. Russia isn't the most evil nation on the earth (North Korea or China might be), but overall they haven't given anyone reason to trust them.
Also, you could check out the Binding of the Blade series. Definitely fantasy and overtly Christianized. The author does not explicitly mention Christianity, but the characters reference a single God and the story arc is about God's interaction with His creation, not about individual characters.
The characters come and go (sadly), but ultimately their goal in life is to accomplish the will of God (i.e. your Christian overtones). And yeah, like Lewis, I agree with the author's theological points. So, I'm biased.
Still these are VERY well written stories.
Other than that caveat, the violence is not any more graphic than Tolkien and no other objectionable elements exist.
For the record, Lewis wasn't trying to write "Evangelistic" literature. He wanted to teach children ideas about right/wrong, self-sacrifice, good behavior and such. His self-avowed goal with those series was to plant seeds of good conduct not to explicitly attempt a conversion.
And, yes, I like the books and agree with what he did with them.
Agreed. They have been saying that network/internet access is required for a while. Without internet, the game would lose much of the variability in play.
What they didn't mention was the phone home.... Now, I have to decide if I will buy it. Arg. Hate that.
Sadly, the question is one of social engineering. And patch levels. If you can't be socially engineered, then maybe someone else in your company can be. If they are, can we hack your system from theirs?
Not saying that you are wrong, but there are ways to bypass encryption. It just takes a little longer.
PS. Watch out for those malicious QuickTime videos.... They'll take everyone's system for a ride.
Yes. ERD can do that, but can it do it while maintaining the volatile memory? Will it do that while catching the current connections to the PC? Those are very important to an investigation.
If you have your TrueCrypt file mounted, then they can access it. With a reboot to use ERD, that can't happen. Any other encryption keys caught in memory (including IE passwords) will be lost on a reboot.
So, what is scary is this: IF this device will bypass the screensaver password and grant access to the system via 1-2 clicks, then we are seeing a true backdoor into the system.
Now, I have spent time with plenty of these types of investigators and they are good guys who are overworked now. You don't have to worry about them to much. What I now worry about is someone else reverse engineering this now that it is public knowledge.
Can't say. All I know about Tesla is that after he worked for Edison, he filed 5 patents on AC motors. Tesla later went on to work for Westinghouse (who also bought all 5 of Tesla's patents). I was not aware that Edison and Tesla ever had a disagreement.
I knew this. As I said, I had been reading about it. Still does not change my position that long before the debate occurred, Edison still feared AC. Yes, he wanted the money and power. Yes, he wasn't perfect. But it wasn't entirely FUD. That's all.
So no, I'm not an easy mark. I just didn't dump all of my knowledge at once as it didn't change my conclusion.
Yup. My point was that his Fear was rational. People died accidentally. He wasn't really over exaggerating. One guy was fried in public at lunch time on a telegraph pole due to AC. Edison encouraged the legitimate fear for financial gain, but the fear was real.
Analogy: Apple encourages people to migrate from Microsoft to avoid ID stealing virii. Is Apple correct that most ID stealing virii affect MS products? Sure. Is that spreading FUD? Probably, but no different than Edison.
No offense meant to you. I'm just a bit opinionated as I just finished reading about all of this....:-)
Hmmm. Evidence would indicate that Edison actually feared AC. Long before the AC v DC wars with Westinghouse, Edison was on record as saying that AC was to dangerous to use. And, given the poor insulation and low safety standards of the day, he was correct. Many more people died from accidental contact with AC then ever from DC.
How so? I just finished reading Edison and the Electric Chair. I did not know much about Edison or Westinghouse (and Tesla only made brief appearances).
A major point that I came away with was this: Edison was a bit unethical; Westinghouse made Edison look saintly. Edison would manipulate public opinion, but Westinghouse lied, bribed and disregarded the public to make headway against Edison Electric.
Both men did great things and invented useful technology. Neither was a shining example of ethics. But, lets remember that Edison was not accused of bribing the entire New York State Legislature or NYC officials or just about everyone in sight. Nor did Edison disregard the safety of people. Westinghouse blew off safety concerns and consequently many people died.
While a destination is useful, did you notice how may qualifiers were in the OP? Every sentence (some exaggeration) was qualified with a "may be" might have" or "theoretically." Not a confidence inspiring article to say the least.
And I would like to recommend Keith Laumer from Baen. His "spaceport novels" are just plain fun. Not as in depth or engrossing as Seven Suns, but I still enjoy Laumer for a downtime reading.
More to the point, does this impact "global warming?"
Does this soft element transmit heat from the earth's core to the surface more easily than previously thought? Does that account for the change in temperatures? Is this a new phenomenon?
Actually, an organization can pick either option. So either way, MS could count thousands of Vista sales for a mid-sized company. Not that the company actually runs that, but just that's how MS works it.
I'm not certain that I understood your comment. If you thought that I was referring to Software Assurance when I mentioned site license, I apologize. Actually, a site license gives a company the right to use the software anywhere in the organization on as many systems as they want. The price being dictated by the amount of users. A site license is a subscription service though. It is cheaper for many companies since they do not need to worry about compliance nor do they need to figure out which OS a specific computer has permission to use.
Anyway, not a really big deal though I suspect that MS uses these numbers to boost their Vista adoption figures.
Not so. Downgrade rights only exist in the corporate sector.
Now, what skews the numbers is NOT OEM. Any business that buys a site license buys said license for the current OS (i.e. Vista). The business then buys the CD for whatever OS they really plan to install (XP or 2000 or NT).
So, every company that renews their site license this year will be counted as purchasing Vista - even if the never make a change.
Slashdot Mirror
HalfLife? I agree that they are few and far between, but not exactly gone.... Now, if only I could get some co-op play on the PC....
Generally, I avoid these debates; I voted already, so whatever. But, why aren't Obama's associations important? (I am asking respectfully; an irony here to be sure) :)
Look, I don't care that Obama and Ayers ended up on the same committee per se. That happens. But (and I could be wrong here), wasn't it more than one council? And didn't they spend quite a bit of time together voluntarily?
More importantly, Obama viewed and wrote that Wright was his mentor and guide. Wright disturbs me; not because I'm racist (I have minority friends). Anyone who calls me racist because I'm white tends to disturb me. I could deal with that, but Wright wants to take it much further and oppress me. He rejects any view of a God that likes white people. This sounds racist to me, but maybe I'm just deceived about the definition of racism. Obama called this man his mentor? I'm not sure I want someone who looked up to Wright for decades to be leading this country. Just not sure I want to encourage reverse discrimination against myself (or anyone else for that matter). The Bible strongly condemns discrimination.
In the end, taken separately and in small bites, neither association is necessarily a big deal, but together in the quantities in which Obama indulged himself in these relationships with extremists makes this a worthwhile subject to consider.
In my opinion at least.
I vote StarDock for everything. Want to make a statement to EA? buy StarDock.
Um.... In the 1890's Germany was known as the most scientific nation on earth. They knew it and flaunted it as well. Ergo, a fairly arrogant nation. Take that backdrop and consider that most westernized countries were extremely nationalistic (to a fault) in first 40 years of the 20th century. We'll get back to that.
Enter, WW1 and the attempt to initiate the second Reich. It failed.
One of the reasons that Hitler succeeded as far as he did was through the intense nationalism of other countries. It led to many good people viewing Hitler's message of nationalism as a good thing especially when compared to the rise of Communism. They saw Hitler's nationalism blending with Italy's fascism and considered Germany to be a great buffer zone against Russia.
Now, the economic situation helped Hitler rise to power, but it most certainly was not the only nor the primary reason. If it was, how do you explain the attempt at initiating a Third Reich?
The truth is that Hitler rose primarily based on his oratorical skills and intuitive understanding of people. He was truly a masterful politician.
Anyway, are you suggesting that the US is trying to economically expand its borders via monetary investment (and consequently democracy)? How is that aggression? Go ask these countries if they want America to take its money and go home. Investment typically == improved lifestyles. (Not always, I'm not naive.) your suggestion if I understand it is ludicrous. Russia is a threat; though I'm certainly not looking to see war. It's quite clear that reporters investigating the Kremlin are dying. It's quite clear that the current leader is Putin's puppet.
There's no conspiracy theory here. The facts stand for themselves. Russia isn't the most evil nation on the earth (North Korea or China might be), but overall they haven't given anyone reason to trust them.
Also, you could check out the Binding of the Blade series. Definitely fantasy and overtly Christianized. The author does not explicitly mention Christianity, but the characters reference a single God and the story arc is about God's interaction with His creation, not about individual characters.
The characters come and go (sadly), but ultimately their goal in life is to accomplish the will of God (i.e. your Christian overtones). And yeah, like Lewis, I agree with the author's theological points. So, I'm biased.
Still these are VERY well written stories.
Other than that caveat, the violence is not any more graphic than Tolkien and no other objectionable elements exist.
I reviewed them more in depth at Conservativebooktalk.com.
For the record, Lewis wasn't trying to write "Evangelistic" literature. He wanted to teach children ideas about right/wrong, self-sacrifice, good behavior and such. His self-avowed goal with those series was to plant seeds of good conduct not to explicitly attempt a conversion.
And, yes, I like the books and agree with what he did with them.
Agreed. They have been saying that network/internet access is required for a while. Without internet, the game would lose much of the variability in play.
What they didn't mention was the phone home.... Now, I have to decide if I will buy it. Arg. Hate that.
Sadly, the question is one of social engineering. And patch levels. If you can't be socially engineered, then maybe someone else in your company can be. If they are, can we hack your system from theirs?
Not saying that you are wrong, but there are ways to bypass encryption. It just takes a little longer.
PS. Watch out for those malicious QuickTime videos.... They'll take everyone's system for a ride.
Yes. ERD can do that, but can it do it while maintaining the volatile memory? Will it do that while catching the current connections to the PC? Those are very important to an investigation.
If you have your TrueCrypt file mounted, then they can access it. With a reboot to use ERD, that can't happen. Any other encryption keys caught in memory (including IE passwords) will be lost on a reboot.
So, what is scary is this: IF this device will bypass the screensaver password and grant access to the system via 1-2 clicks, then we are seeing a true backdoor into the system.
Now, I have spent time with plenty of these types of investigators and they are good guys who are overworked now. You don't have to worry about them to much. What I now worry about is someone else reverse engineering this now that it is public knowledge.
I dunno. Rotate the display by 90 degrees and go tall screen....
:-D
Agreed. And, while not a perfect organization, SANS does not appear to problematic as a whole.
Sorry. I was not aware of anything that about the Heartland institute. It was a convenient link to the journal article.
Umm, well since this global warming theory is still just a theory, how about we get some hard evidence before eviscerating companies? Read this: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=1b702e93-802a-23ad-406d-20a0e08818af and this: http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=22434
Can't say. All I know about Tesla is that after he worked for Edison, he filed 5 patents on AC motors. Tesla later went on to work for Westinghouse (who also bought all 5 of Tesla's patents). I was not aware that Edison and Tesla ever had a disagreement.
Meh.
I knew this. As I said, I had been reading about it. Still does not change my position that long before the debate occurred, Edison still feared AC. Yes, he wanted the money and power. Yes, he wasn't perfect. But it wasn't entirely FUD. That's all.
So no, I'm not an easy mark. I just didn't dump all of my knowledge at once as it didn't change my conclusion.
Have a good evening.
Yup. My point was that his Fear was rational. People died accidentally. He wasn't really over exaggerating. One guy was fried in public at lunch time on a telegraph pole due to AC. Edison encouraged the legitimate fear for financial gain, but the fear was real.
:-)
Analogy: Apple encourages people to migrate from Microsoft to avoid ID stealing virii. Is Apple correct that most ID stealing virii affect MS products? Sure. Is that spreading FUD? Probably, but no different than Edison.
No offense meant to you. I'm just a bit opinionated as I just finished reading about all of this....
Hmmm. Evidence would indicate that Edison actually feared AC. Long before the AC v DC wars with Westinghouse, Edison was on record as saying that AC was to dangerous to use. And, given the poor insulation and low safety standards of the day, he was correct. Many more people died from accidental contact with AC then ever from DC.
How so? I just finished reading Edison and the Electric Chair. I did not know much about Edison or Westinghouse (and Tesla only made brief appearances).
A major point that I came away with was this: Edison was a bit unethical; Westinghouse made Edison look saintly. Edison would manipulate public opinion, but Westinghouse lied, bribed and disregarded the public to make headway against Edison Electric.
Both men did great things and invented useful technology. Neither was a shining example of ethics. But, lets remember that Edison was not accused of bribing the entire New York State Legislature or NYC officials or just about everyone in sight. Nor did Edison disregard the safety of people. Westinghouse blew off safety concerns and consequently many people died.
While a destination is useful, did you notice how may qualifiers were in the OP? Every sentence (some exaggeration) was qualified with a "may be" might have" or "theoretically." Not a confidence inspiring article to say the least.
And I would like to recommend Keith Laumer from Baen. His "spaceport novels" are just plain fun. Not as in depth or engrossing as Seven Suns, but I still enjoy Laumer for a downtime reading.
If I had mod points, I give you a +1 for linking me to that great book. I love that series....
More to the point, does this impact "global warming?"
Does this soft element transmit heat from the earth's core to the surface more easily than previously thought? Does that account for the change in temperatures? Is this a new phenomenon?
Actually, an organization can pick either option. So either way, MS could count thousands of Vista sales for a mid-sized company. Not that the company actually runs that, but just that's how MS works it.
I'm not certain that I understood your comment. If you thought that I was referring to Software Assurance when I mentioned site license, I apologize. Actually, a site license gives a company the right to use the software anywhere in the organization on as many systems as they want. The price being dictated by the amount of users. A site license is a subscription service though. It is cheaper for many companies since they do not need to worry about compliance nor do they need to figure out which OS a specific computer has permission to use.
Anyway, not a really big deal though I suspect that MS uses these numbers to boost their Vista adoption figures.
Not so. Downgrade rights only exist in the corporate sector.
Now, what skews the numbers is NOT OEM. Any business that buys a site license buys said license for the current OS (i.e. Vista). The business then buys the CD for whatever OS they really plan to install (XP or 2000 or NT).
So, every company that renews their site license this year will be counted as purchasing Vista - even if the never make a change.