The collective moral fiber has nothing to do with deciding what makes it on TV. The FCC moral committee or whatever the hell they call themselves these days do. You're right, they are not all old, and probably not all of them are religious but they follow the few that are so I lump them together anyway.
The FCC morals board are a few select individuals, not a grouping of people. So making a classification of them is acceptable. Generally I'm aware I shouldn't because it being unfair to the those on the board which probably disagree but don't have enough votes to change anything.
Now, my definition of reasonable. This is a tough definition, but here goes... someone who can live their life without the need to force other people to live to their idealogy. They can accept that there are those who disagree, even debate them. But to reduce the whole topic an assumption match is just plain unproductive.
You are right, I'm not advocating majority rule because inherently that alienates other people. I'm advocating freedom of programming which does not currently exist because of the FCC and morals committee.
Sorry you are mistaken. Changing it from the recovery console is different, it will prevent even system from starting the service. Obviously the best method is to just remove the unneeded service from the registry. Then you never have to worry about it, until the next service pack which reinstalls it that is.
That is a hilarious vision. They will never reign, nor should they. No one should. That's the point. Content creators should have the right to produce what they want and what they think will make them the most money.
Sorry but you are making assumptions about my experiences. I lived and grew up in a place with a great public school system. Jericho, VT. I had four friends in early elementary education who were great friends, happy, and outgoing. The a year before they entered middle school their parents took them out of school and chose to teach them religion as fact and not what it is, a belief system.
Five years later it was time for high school, two of them attempted to come back to school but couldn't handle being around that many people to the point where one had an anxiety attack right there in school. This is was after a great welcome because we hadn't seen them in years and missed them.
The other two people I met two years after high school, one was working steady at a retail outlet living by himself and the other was still living in his parents basement. Neither had any plans to further their education.
I also stated flat out that I didn't believe this was the case for all home schooled students. I understand there are public schools that can't teach a 4th grader how to read let alone algebra. I also know that you need to take them out for the right reasons. If the kid was adjusting well to the public school setting then home schooling was the right option. But I would say that it is often done for the wrong reasons.
Now, shame on you for assuming I don't know what I'm talking about, I made no such assumption about you. My mother is an 8th grade math teacher and she would state flat out contrary to what you have said. She has dealt will well over 30 home schooled kids and their parents. She has seen it turn out alright, and she's seen it turn out horribly wrong. I'd say more states need to impose stricter standards for education. Public and private schools have to adhere to certain standards. Many states (Not all) do not require home school teacher to have the same standards.
I'll give you that, but I think that is largely because non-religious types have historically been the ones oppressed. Think most early philosophers.
I have a very catholic friend whom I have very intelligent conversations with. We both think there is something out there with more intelligence but it is to say that humans won't have the same ability a thousand or even a million years from now?
Its a great discussion everytime because neither side has all the answers.
I agree there is an intolerance for religious people mainly because their are some very vocal fanatics that take it too far which give the whole thing a bad image. Consider my ultra catholic friend again, he does not look down on me for thinking differently and so I do not look down on him. We both disagree and we both respect eachother. Far too often I see people of religion seeing my disagreeing with their beliefs as an attack on their beliefs as can be seen here on slashdot today.
Read other posts in this section, everyone else has already voiced this issue and I have already addressed that this technology is a great tool to assist in the upbringing of a child but it is not an end all be all.
Morality should not be codified into law because morality is not a commonality among all cultures. There are basic morala such as murder, rape, theft, the crimes that every religion and every reasonable person would deem as unacceptable. The United States is founded on the creed that I have complete freedom as long as that freedom does not remove the freedom of another person.
Also I would suggest that you not attempt to classify a group of people. The old religious farts I was referring to are the FCC board of morals which force their beliefs on the rest of the country.
I'll also add that most of what I want is an accurate portrayal or at least a more real portrayal which currently would not be allowed on television
I believe content creators should have the freedom to produce what they see fit and the collective moral fiber of the country will determine if its a successful release. Then instead of content being driven by someone with one exclusive belief it can be driven by the collective beliefs of the majority of the population or small segments depending on the target audience.
I said outright that I agree with the technology and I believe you have the right to censor what can be seen but I also don't believe its a replacement for parenting or education. Some things such as violence can be censored without harm but others such as curse words only prevent the child from understanding what he or she hears in public. Teaching them that such language is not acceptable and stating why is a much better approach in my opinion that is. Apparently have to to clarify that for most people here. I am not stating my way is the right way and that other ways are wrong.
You sir, are mistaken. The FCC controls what is put on television. They have a board of censors which determine what should and should not get on TV based on their morals. They are effectively pushing their beliefs because they are not giving the freedom to the content producers.
You are making assumptions about me and assuming I am talking about you which is not the case. I have no problem with you or your beliefs. I have respect for any parent that is involved with the upbringing of their children.
I am referring to the parents that would use it as a babysitter thus negating anything they could possibly learn from it.
I am not pushing my beliefs, I believe it is up to the content creators to create what they think the most people want to watch and the religious right that controls the FCC "morals board" would be the people I was talking about. Parents have every right to censor what their children see and experience but there are many who take it too far. I have several friends that dropped out of my school because their parents were ultra religious and thought their children should not learn about evolution. I have a big problem with this, then again, I grew in a school where evolution was taught as fact and creationism was one of the theories for kick starting evolution, one of many theories discussed.
As for your question about whether I have children, I have a niece which I raised as my daughter because my sister needed help and I had the time and resources to assist. As a result there is a very happy, smart, and very well adjusted child.
As for prescreening, who cares if they hear a curse word? Teach them that its wrong, don't stop them from hearing it because believe me, they've heard it already as soon as they go out in public with you. When it comes to a sex scene there is always forewarning, as for violence, you're right there, a lot of the time its without warning but again, if it does come up suddenly explain to them its wrong. Growing up my parents always just said don't do this, or don't do that, they never explained why!
As for public places I believe there is a standard of decency that needs to be maintained but right now you will hear a lot of cursing and see a great deal of suggestive or perverse language.
So please, do not assume that I don't tolerate or even respect your beliefs. As I said before, I have every respect for a parent that is involved with the upbringing of their child, but to assume your way is the only way or that someone that disagrees with you doesn't tolerate you is well, naive or more probably you are constantly acosted by people who don't respect your beliefs so you assume I don't.
Again, please don't assume I don't have any clue about this subject, most everyone has a clue because most everyone has had parents which chose to raise them a certain way. Now that I am older my parents and I see eye to eye on many of these issues and they had three children, one is now 28, another is 25, and another is 21 so I think they are qualified to support me.
I am not saying my way is the only way. I'm merely stating what I think is best for the most people. Different people are going to require different strategies for raising them. Some will need more discipline than others, some need to be able to roam a bit.
I was not talking about parents or even content creators when talking about the people that force their beliefs. I was talking about the FCC and their "moral value" board which is controled by the religious right, always has been. They've been forced over time to relax their restrictions but with the new administration that is changing again.
I am not complaining about this service at all, as I do think its a great technology, but it is not a replacement for a parent or other type of person supervising. Many people will use it as such which is why I voiced the concern. I know many people will use it as a tool to help them control the content their kids are exposed to.
Also I would like to add that I do believe its the parents right to teach their kids how they see fit as long as it is them who is doing the teaching and not the television. I may not agree with their beliefs but they certainly have the right to think it and teach it to their children. My parents raised me catholic and well, things changed as soon as I realized the hyprocisy of the whole situation but I do not look down on anyone for any one reason. I know plenty of perfectly rational religious people.
You drastically under estimate the time it takes to organize 30 or more kids around a flag to say the pledge which is usually done before school starts. We'd always meet early and start playing. Great way to start a day off right.
I agree the post was a little harsh on home schooling but it is a reality that many kids do not come out well adjusted because they lack crucial exposure to other children. Also, it is very important for a child to be able to learn with peers around because as an adult in the work place there will be many situations where the education will not be one on one or even a one on a thousand.
Personally, I've never met a home schooled person that was well adjusted but I blamed that more on the fact that their teachers were religious fanatics that didn't want their kids learning about evolution and the likes. I don't assume this is the case for all home school people but I recognize that it is a very likely outcome.
As for complaining about the GA public school system... I will suggest you move to VT or some place in the North East where education is taught on a fact basis and injecting opinion is not tolerated unless stated very precisely that it is the teacher's opinion and others do not share it.
When it comes to raising a child I truly believe that is the time you move to a suitable location which may or may not be near where you work. In an environment its time to become real, its a great responsibility and the child deserves every chance.
I agree there completely. But that's largely because of how sex is viewed elsewhere. In Hollywood its more or less seen as an exploration of sin, much like movies such as 8mm or the Butterfly Effect.
I think if sex were more acceptable in society then more realistic portrayals would exist in Hollywood.
I couldn't agree more that movies are not a good source of education nor entertainment for a child which should be interacting, learning, playing pretty well non-stop. Its a very large responsibility to take on to have a child and raise them so I'm a big fan of planning for it when you know you can have the time to teach them.
Especially during these days I wonder if I would let my child watch television at all. The Internet is far more powerful, it can engage them on many more levels and I have a lot of tools at my disposal to ensure they don't see things that are inappropriate. Of course, if they do come across something then I won't just tell them to shut up and find something else to do, I will try to talk to them about it on a level they can fully understand and let them know its something they should wait to learn more about because they have loads of other things that are more important to learn first.
I agree that is can be a useful tool, but I also think many parents wait far too long to educate their children.
For instance, with my parents. I turned 21 and they attempted to have a talk with me about responsible drinking. That was well, six years too late and I had already learned the lesson.
As for sex, they've never talked with me about what was acceptable and what wasn't so again I learned for myself and when I brought a girl home they attempted to tell me to be careful.
Seriously, how can a parent decide when a child should be educated on what? I think its best to deal with it as it happens, don't let the child imagine why something is wrong, explain to them why. Its easy to say alcohol is wrong for a child because their bodies are growing and it harms them while in moderation it doesn't harm an adult.
Sex is a little harder to explain to a child but it doesn't mean the issue should come up when the child sees something they don't understand. You don't have to give them graphic details. Generally its hard to discourage the behavior so this is an area I will have to confer with the mother of my child when the day comes.
Still, I don't like censorship, I recognize its reality based need and that I was speaking from an ideal point of view, one in which the parent isn't working two full time jobs to provide the child with food and clothing. It is a great tool to have at the disposal of a parent but it should be used with caution as it does stifle discussion and thus education.
Home schooling causes a very large number of social problems if not done properly. It is very important for a child to be around many children his or her own age. With that in mind it could be done properly although I've yet to see an implementation that has resulted in a stable child although certainly plenty of intelligent people have come from such environments. It really is going to depend on the personality of the child as to whether or not it would work.
As for the "Under God" shit, your child would not forced to say it although he or she might be encouraged to since many others I'm sure would. Coming from a VT public school I'd say I had it pretty lucky, we didn't even do the pledge, we chose to spend the extra time socializing, playing Uno and other such activities.
Might add, if you have a child, consider bring him or her up in an environment more suitable to your beliefs or at least more accepting of alternatives. My school had prayer sessions in the morning in one room where kids could go if they wanted, everyone else hung out in the cafeteria until it was time for school. Evolution was taught as fact and creationism was discussed only because there are people out there that believe it. Generally the two concepts can co-exist but people assume "god" created humans and not single celled organisms which later evolved.
I think a school should be a place of dicussion, I would have no problem with my child being exposed to christianity or any other religion as long as they aren't made to believe its correct, it should be a dicussion about how religion is applied to culture and ultimately how it effects what we see on TV and such. Why was there ever a time on tv when you couldn't say "pregnant?" Nothing wrong with talking about how religions view sex and how atheists see it.
SP2 hasn't come out yet because Microsoft is waiting for all the software company to come out with patches that will allow their code to run properly on a patched machine. It breaks a lot of applications and yes, it really will cut down overflows rather completely or near it depending on how pervasive it is.
You need to disable it with the resource kit. Disabling in the services snapin doesn't actually disable the service. I hate that about how its setup, it makes you think disabled is actually disabled but the SYSTEM user can turn it back on at any time even if the user has to change it back to turn it on themself.
This method is more desirable
If you disable it for real then as I understand it it would prevent a virus from doing anything.
If you are 22 that does not classify you as being one of the ones in power forcing their moral beliefs on the rest of the country.
I agree this is a great technology, but in general censorship bothers me as it removes the education that needs to happen. Most of everything I ever learned about I learned outside of the home because my parents were too uncomfortable to talk about it. The same really goes for violence except there it wasn't a comfort issue nor was it an issue for me because I was always tall and well built.
As for the time excuse, that is just that. When you take on the responsibility to have a child then you must treat it as such. Prescreening is not required, if there is something objectionable then you either shut it off, fast forward or explain to the child why its objectionable, the you're not old enough for this conversation excuse doesn't work either as children a lot more intelligent than a lot of adults give them credit for.
I continue to find this humerous how violence is more acceptable on TV than sex. Of course, someday in the near future I'm fairly certain both will be equally accepted as the old religious farts die off (The ones that control the content)
Perhaps a new breed of people forcing their moral values on the entire country will emerge but hopefully they won't be the ones in control for long if at all.
I never understood why parents couldn't shut the tv off, or better yet, use a vchip like device to stop kids from watching both violence and sex. Of course, these days the news contains a lot of both
This is what MS is attempting to do with XP Service Pack 2
They are entering the game where all memory must be flagged as executable or not-executable when allocated. Great step in the right direction.
Also, I don't have any servers apps that have data in the same location. Exchange and Active Directory are all stored on a RAID 5 while the operating system is only mirrored. We have an image of the operating system which is fully working and we only bother to backup the array. Occasionally we will check the OS's integrity with Tripwire and if it passes then we create a new image and store it along side the old image just in case the unforeseeable happens.
There are ways to deal with these issues, I'd say Linux and Windows following the exact same patching model, the only difference is there are a lot more people developing patches for Linux. Speaks well for OSS but education is still a problem, for whatever the reason many Linux users and worse, admins don't know shit about designing a secure and reliable environment.
As for the firmware idea, I believe that is where the industry is headed. It is a good idea but it does restrict the capabilities of a system while also having a very large margin for error. I can imagine a new install of an OS would require several firmware updates to get the required interface to work, and what if you installed the wrong firmware? It's like an Intel board today, if you want to upgrade the firmware there are so many pre-reqs its often a pain in the ass and worse yet, its a requirement because your backplane will keep dying without it. I think its best just to create a secure model for which to install. Force people to store programs and data in a different location and with different permissions.
The code was for IE5, this is very unlikely. And a patch is available, its called shutting off the help sub-system. With Windows 2000 and XP it is a service, one which I never use, although I'm sure some people do.
As for MS statements about exploits, well... everyone knows that's just plain silly. Right now there is an Exchange vulnerability listed on CERT that contains no patch and several known exploits, has been that way since November.
This is yet another occasion to teach everyone how to run as a user in Windows and not as Administrator. Almost everything is negated or at least mitigated when they are just normal users. Sure it could wipe out their own documents, but it couldn't effect any others and certainly couldn't harm the operating system.
I see this problem a lot on every platform, generally I think people like to feel in control all the time
generally I get about three calls during a normal 3 2 hour period. During a movie I keep it on vibrate, I don't even look at my phone until I get out of the theater unless its from someone important. My phone behaves different if its from someone important, that is a great feature. But I'm drunk right now so I probably shouldn't be commenting at all on this issue.
It is never about what I have to say, it is about what the person on the other end has to say.
After one or two beers people can still handle driving hense the legal drinking limit being.08 instead of.00
There is a threshold for drinking and driving. I agree it does sound similar and I'd like to add that I do try to avoid talking on the phone while driving because the conversation is never more important than the safety of anyone.
Slashdot Mirror
The FCC morals board are a few select individuals, not a grouping of people. So making a classification of them is acceptable. Generally I'm aware I shouldn't because it being unfair to the those on the board which probably disagree but don't have enough votes to change anything.
Now, my definition of reasonable. This is a tough definition, but here goes... someone who can live their life without the need to force other people to live to their idealogy. They can accept that there are those who disagree, even debate them. But to reduce the whole topic an assumption match is just plain unproductive.You are right, I'm not advocating majority rule because inherently that alienates other people. I'm advocating freedom of programming which does not currently exist because of the FCC and morals committee.
Sorry you are mistaken. Changing it from the recovery console is different, it will prevent even system from starting the service. Obviously the best method is to just remove the unneeded service from the registry. Then you never have to worry about it, until the next service pack which reinstalls it that is.
That is a hilarious vision. They will never reign, nor should they. No one should. That's the point. Content creators should have the right to produce what they want and what they think will make them the most money.
Five years later it was time for high school, two of them attempted to come back to school but couldn't handle being around that many people to the point where one had an anxiety attack right there in school. This is was after a great welcome because we hadn't seen them in years and missed them.
The other two people I met two years after high school, one was working steady at a retail outlet living by himself and the other was still living in his parents basement. Neither had any plans to further their education.I also stated flat out that I didn't believe this was the case for all home schooled students. I understand there are public schools that can't teach a 4th grader how to read let alone algebra. I also know that you need to take them out for the right reasons. If the kid was adjusting well to the public school setting then home schooling was the right option. But I would say that it is often done for the wrong reasons.
Now, shame on you for assuming I don't know what I'm talking about, I made no such assumption about you. My mother is an 8th grade math teacher and she would state flat out contrary to what you have said. She has dealt will well over 30 home schooled kids and their parents. She has seen it turn out alright, and she's seen it turn out horribly wrong. I'd say more states need to impose stricter standards for education. Public and private schools have to adhere to certain standards. Many states (Not all) do not require home school teacher to have the same standards.I think that is an excellent approach.
I have a very catholic friend whom I have very intelligent conversations with. We both think there is something out there with more intelligence but it is to say that humans won't have the same ability a thousand or even a million years from now?
Its a great discussion everytime because neither side has all the answers.I agree there is an intolerance for religious people mainly because their are some very vocal fanatics that take it too far which give the whole thing a bad image. Consider my ultra catholic friend again, he does not look down on me for thinking differently and so I do not look down on him. We both disagree and we both respect eachother. Far too often I see people of religion seeing my disagreeing with their beliefs as an attack on their beliefs as can be seen here on slashdot today.
Morality should not be codified into law because morality is not a commonality among all cultures. There are basic morala such as murder, rape, theft, the crimes that every religion and every reasonable person would deem as unacceptable. The United States is founded on the creed that I have complete freedom as long as that freedom does not remove the freedom of another person.
Also I would suggest that you not attempt to classify a group of people. The old religious farts I was referring to are the FCC board of morals which force their beliefs on the rest of the country.I'll also add that most of what I want is an accurate portrayal or at least a more real portrayal which currently would not be allowed on television
I believe content creators should have the freedom to produce what they see fit and the collective moral fiber of the country will determine if its a successful release. Then instead of content being driven by someone with one exclusive belief it can be driven by the collective beliefs of the majority of the population or small segments depending on the target audience.I said outright that I agree with the technology and I believe you have the right to censor what can be seen but I also don't believe its a replacement for parenting or education. Some things such as violence can be censored without harm but others such as curse words only prevent the child from understanding what he or she hears in public. Teaching them that such language is not acceptable and stating why is a much better approach in my opinion that is. Apparently have to to clarify that for most people here. I am not stating my way is the right way and that other ways are wrong.
You sir, are mistaken. The FCC controls what is put on television. They have a board of censors which determine what should and should not get on TV based on their morals. They are effectively pushing their beliefs because they are not giving the freedom to the content producers.
I am referring to the parents that would use it as a babysitter thus negating anything they could possibly learn from it.
I am not pushing my beliefs, I believe it is up to the content creators to create what they think the most people want to watch and the religious right that controls the FCC "morals board" would be the people I was talking about. Parents have every right to censor what their children see and experience but there are many who take it too far. I have several friends that dropped out of my school because their parents were ultra religious and thought their children should not learn about evolution. I have a big problem with this, then again, I grew in a school where evolution was taught as fact and creationism was one of the theories for kick starting evolution, one of many theories discussed.As for your question about whether I have children, I have a niece which I raised as my daughter because my sister needed help and I had the time and resources to assist. As a result there is a very happy, smart, and very well adjusted child.
As for prescreening, who cares if they hear a curse word? Teach them that its wrong, don't stop them from hearing it because believe me, they've heard it already as soon as they go out in public with you. When it comes to a sex scene there is always forewarning, as for violence, you're right there, a lot of the time its without warning but again, if it does come up suddenly explain to them its wrong. Growing up my parents always just said don't do this, or don't do that, they never explained why!As for public places I believe there is a standard of decency that needs to be maintained but right now you will hear a lot of cursing and see a great deal of suggestive or perverse language.
So please, do not assume that I don't tolerate or even respect your beliefs. As I said before, I have every respect for a parent that is involved with the upbringing of their child, but to assume your way is the only way or that someone that disagrees with you doesn't tolerate you is well, naive or more probably you are constantly acosted by people who don't respect your beliefs so you assume I don't.Again, please don't assume I don't have any clue about this subject, most everyone has a clue because most everyone has had parents which chose to raise them a certain way. Now that I am older my parents and I see eye to eye on many of these issues and they had three children, one is now 28, another is 25, and another is 21 so I think they are qualified to support me.
I am not saying my way is the only way. I'm merely stating what I think is best for the most people. Different people are going to require different strategies for raising them. Some will need more discipline than others, some need to be able to roam a bit.I am not complaining about this service at all, as I do think its a great technology, but it is not a replacement for a parent or other type of person supervising. Many people will use it as such which is why I voiced the concern. I know many people will use it as a tool to help them control the content their kids are exposed to.
Also I would like to add that I do believe its the parents right to teach their kids how they see fit as long as it is them who is doing the teaching and not the television. I may not agree with their beliefs but they certainly have the right to think it and teach it to their children. My parents raised me catholic and well, things changed as soon as I realized the hyprocisy of the whole situation but I do not look down on anyone for any one reason. I know plenty of perfectly rational religious people.I agree the post was a little harsh on home schooling but it is a reality that many kids do not come out well adjusted because they lack crucial exposure to other children. Also, it is very important for a child to be able to learn with peers around because as an adult in the work place there will be many situations where the education will not be one on one or even a one on a thousand.
Personally, I've never met a home schooled person that was well adjusted but I blamed that more on the fact that their teachers were religious fanatics that didn't want their kids learning about evolution and the likes. I don't assume this is the case for all home school people but I recognize that it is a very likely outcome.As for complaining about the GA public school system... I will suggest you move to VT or some place in the North East where education is taught on a fact basis and injecting opinion is not tolerated unless stated very precisely that it is the teacher's opinion and others do not share it.
When it comes to raising a child I truly believe that is the time you move to a suitable location which may or may not be near where you work. In an environment its time to become real, its a great responsibility and the child deserves every chance.I think if sex were more acceptable in society then more realistic portrayals would exist in Hollywood.
I couldn't agree more that movies are not a good source of education nor entertainment for a child which should be interacting, learning, playing pretty well non-stop. Its a very large responsibility to take on to have a child and raise them so I'm a big fan of planning for it when you know you can have the time to teach them.Especially during these days I wonder if I would let my child watch television at all. The Internet is far more powerful, it can engage them on many more levels and I have a lot of tools at my disposal to ensure they don't see things that are inappropriate. Of course, if they do come across something then I won't just tell them to shut up and find something else to do, I will try to talk to them about it on a level they can fully understand and let them know its something they should wait to learn more about because they have loads of other things that are more important to learn first.
They actually don't control the content, I'm referring to the FCC censors. MTV would love to show nudity because they know it would boost ratings.
Last I checked it did, as I have it installed on an Athlon machine here in my lab.
For instance, with my parents. I turned 21 and they attempted to have a talk with me about responsible drinking. That was well, six years too late and I had already learned the lesson.
As for sex, they've never talked with me about what was acceptable and what wasn't so again I learned for myself and when I brought a girl home they attempted to tell me to be careful.Seriously, how can a parent decide when a child should be educated on what? I think its best to deal with it as it happens, don't let the child imagine why something is wrong, explain to them why. Its easy to say alcohol is wrong for a child because their bodies are growing and it harms them while in moderation it doesn't harm an adult.
Sex is a little harder to explain to a child but it doesn't mean the issue should come up when the child sees something they don't understand. You don't have to give them graphic details. Generally its hard to discourage the behavior so this is an area I will have to confer with the mother of my child when the day comes.Still, I don't like censorship, I recognize its reality based need and that I was speaking from an ideal point of view, one in which the parent isn't working two full time jobs to provide the child with food and clothing. It is a great tool to have at the disposal of a parent but it should be used with caution as it does stifle discussion and thus education.
As for the "Under God" shit, your child would not forced to say it although he or she might be encouraged to since many others I'm sure would. Coming from a VT public school I'd say I had it pretty lucky, we didn't even do the pledge, we chose to spend the extra time socializing, playing Uno and other such activities.
Might add, if you have a child, consider bring him or her up in an environment more suitable to your beliefs or at least more accepting of alternatives. My school had prayer sessions in the morning in one room where kids could go if they wanted, everyone else hung out in the cafeteria until it was time for school. Evolution was taught as fact and creationism was discussed only because there are people out there that believe it. Generally the two concepts can co-exist but people assume "god" created humans and not single celled organisms which later evolved.I think a school should be a place of dicussion, I would have no problem with my child being exposed to christianity or any other religion as long as they aren't made to believe its correct, it should be a dicussion about how religion is applied to culture and ultimately how it effects what we see on TV and such. Why was there ever a time on tv when you couldn't say "pregnant?" Nothing wrong with talking about how religions view sex and how atheists see it.
This explains their approach
This method is more desirable If you disable it for real then as I understand it it would prevent a virus from doing anything.
I agree this is a great technology, but in general censorship bothers me as it removes the education that needs to happen. Most of everything I ever learned about I learned outside of the home because my parents were too uncomfortable to talk about it. The same really goes for violence except there it wasn't a comfort issue nor was it an issue for me because I was always tall and well built.
As for the time excuse, that is just that. When you take on the responsibility to have a child then you must treat it as such. Prescreening is not required, if there is something objectionable then you either shut it off, fast forward or explain to the child why its objectionable, the you're not old enough for this conversation excuse doesn't work either as children a lot more intelligent than a lot of adults give them credit for.Perhaps a new breed of people forcing their moral values on the entire country will emerge but hopefully they won't be the ones in control for long if at all.
I never understood why parents couldn't shut the tv off, or better yet, use a vchip like device to stop kids from watching both violence and sex. Of course, these days the news contains a lot of bothThey are entering the game where all memory must be flagged as executable or not-executable when allocated. Great step in the right direction.
Also, I don't have any servers apps that have data in the same location. Exchange and Active Directory are all stored on a RAID 5 while the operating system is only mirrored. We have an image of the operating system which is fully working and we only bother to backup the array. Occasionally we will check the OS's integrity with Tripwire and if it passes then we create a new image and store it along side the old image just in case the unforeseeable happens.There are ways to deal with these issues, I'd say Linux and Windows following the exact same patching model, the only difference is there are a lot more people developing patches for Linux. Speaks well for OSS but education is still a problem, for whatever the reason many Linux users and worse, admins don't know shit about designing a secure and reliable environment.
As for the firmware idea, I believe that is where the industry is headed. It is a good idea but it does restrict the capabilities of a system while also having a very large margin for error. I can imagine a new install of an OS would require several firmware updates to get the required interface to work, and what if you installed the wrong firmware? It's like an Intel board today, if you want to upgrade the firmware there are so many pre-reqs its often a pain in the ass and worse yet, its a requirement because your backplane will keep dying without it. I think its best just to create a secure model for which to install. Force people to store programs and data in a different location and with different permissions.As for MS statements about exploits, well... everyone knows that's just plain silly. Right now there is an Exchange vulnerability listed on CERT that contains no patch and several known exploits, has been that way since November.
This is yet another occasion to teach everyone how to run as a user in Windows and not as Administrator. Almost everything is negated or at least mitigated when they are just normal users. Sure it could wipe out their own documents, but it couldn't effect any others and certainly couldn't harm the operating system.I see this problem a lot on every platform, generally I think people like to feel in control all the time
generally I get about three calls during a normal 3 2 hour period. During a movie I keep it on vibrate, I don't even look at my phone until I get out of the theater unless its from someone important. My phone behaves different if its from someone important, that is a great feature. But I'm drunk right now so I probably shouldn't be commenting at all on this issue.
After one or two beers people can still handle driving hense the legal drinking limit being .08 instead of .00
There is a threshold for drinking and driving. I agree it does sound similar and I'd like to add that I do try to avoid talking on the phone while driving because the conversation is never more important than the safety of anyone.