I mentioned the word "server" to my sister the other week, and she had to ask what it was. After trying to explain how it was different than her Dell laptop, I finally sent her a picture off google images of a big server rack and she finally got it.
So you have given her entirely the wrong information, and you wonder why the general public don't understand what it's all about.
A server is a piece of software, which provides a service to other pieces of software, whether they are on the same machine or a remote machine. Hence in Linux we have the X server, which provides the GUI to the local machine. It can also be used to provide a GUI to a remote machine. It does not have to be based in a 42U rack !
The pictures you sent to your sister are only pictures of machines that are designed to be more reliable at providing a service to many other remote machines, and also are dedicated to providing that service. If one day she gets hacked and you discover that somebody has installed an FTP server on her machine, how are you going to explain that ? She will most likely think that a server is only a massive pile of boxes somewhere else, never that her lowly little machine is just as capable of acting in that capacity.
i would rather have the Bluray they were first to propose the idea, they came up with the best format(capacity wise) and they are the only ones to produce a PC-writer AFAIK. I don't care about past mistakes (Sony Media), they produce good shit.
Party % of seats %of vote
Labour 55 35.2
Tory 30.5 32.3
Liberal 9.6 22.0
And the only party to vote for in order to change this condition is the Liberal (democrats).
They are the only party that are committed to proportional representation. The introduction of PR would do nothing to maintain the Liberals hold over power, but would prevent the other parties from doing so, as they have been doing for generations. Instead we would have a real representation of the peoples wishes. Your table would then read:
Party % of seats %of vote
Labour 35.2 35.2
Tory 32.3 32.3
Liberal 22.0 22.0
Others 10.5 10.5
Couple that with a requirement for a 75% majority to pass legislation, and nothing could be passed without the involvement of all the parties, through alliances and agreements. As the situation currently stands, just over 1/3 of the electorate are effectively dictating to the other 2/3. How can that be democratic ? And politicians wonder why the turnout is so low.
I'm pretty sure that those present at the signing of the Magna Carta would not approve of this.
You do realise that the Magna Carta was an agreement between the King and the most powerful noblemen of the time (later to become organised as Parliament). The only real benefit for the ordinary person was the "right" to have a fair trial.
Britain doesn't have a written constitution, so if the government of the day can get something past Parliament, then that's that. What really bugs me is that the Labour Party were supposed to represent the workers, the ordinary people who do all the work, as opposed to the landowners and nobility. And yet they have done more to oppress the workers than any Conservative govt. has ever done.
I think that maybe they've realised that in order to represent the "workers" you must keep them as "workers", otherwise they become naturally more Conservative in outlook. And considering that they have only been in existence as a political party for around 107 years, they learned the tricks quite quickly. Britain saw more growth and social change under the Whigs (Liberals) than they will ever see under Labour.
So to return to your point, I think those present at the signing of the Magna Carta would in fact approve of this kind of legislation, as it allows them to increase their own power over the population, at the expense of the Ruler, who in this day and age is supposed to be the people.
By 2012, children in the US will be fully protected from sex. At birth, their genitals will be removed and stored on ice. The genitals will be reattached once the children have grown up and married.
By 2012, children in the US will be fully protected from sex. At birth, their genitals will be removed and stored on ice. All further procreation is then the exclusive preserve of Monsanto.
The good Star Trek has always been a platform for commentary about everything from the human condition to modern politics. Since I sincerely doubt that anyone today can identify with a "major war" (which would be something along the lines of a WWII scenario IN SPACE!), the commentary aspect of Star Trek would be completely lost.
Of course the new BSG has no social commentary, politics, or war, that's why it's such a hit !
but isn't it time we rewarded excellence instead of stupidity?
Being good brings it's own rewards. How is anybody being rewarded for their stupidity in this case ? (unless it's their *just* rewards.)
I've been mulling over a similar project for a while now. Based on the number of outright dangerous and illegal maneuvers I see people perform when driving, I feel that for the law to work, somebody has to give a shit. So, I intend to capture video of the said actions and post them on a web site, together with the time, date and car registration. If the police want to prosecute then the evidence is there. If the culprit wants me to remove the video, then they can pay me to take it down (which will then go to charity). No, that's not blackmail, because the evidence is already public, and I'm not threatening any other actions. If there are any legal ramifications from displaying the licence plate, I'll blank them out for the public area and keep an unexpurgated copy in case the police need the information. I make my living from being on the road, and it is in my, and everybody elses best interests that the rules are followed as far as possible. Thousands die on the roads because people are either ignorant of the rules, or just plain ignorant - that is not acceptable. Consequences are vital to any laws, otherwise they're just words.
Most of the posts so far are just whining assholes , saying "me, me, me, me, me !". Virtual threats, like "if they don't sell it here, it will create a black market and I'll get one off ebay" or "what good is it without first world (read MY) participation" and "I want one because.... or else".
This whole project has been designed to fulfill a purpose, and that purpose is not to provide yet another gadget for bored geeks. Would any of you complain because the Red Cross don't rush around to your house when you run out of water or food in the fridge ? These devices are being sold to governments to lend to their nations children for education purposes. You are not paying for them, you didn't pay to design them, you have no stake in them whatsoever.
It's ironic that none of you minded there being a disparity in technology between first and third worlds when it was in favour of the first world. Now it's a case of "they shouldn't have it unless we do too !". The same attitude that arose from Kyoto - why should China and India be allowed to burn fossil fuels if we have to cut down ? After all, we've only had that luxury for 200 years or more, why should they get the same chances as us ? After all if we have to use clean technology (based on our mature industries) why shouldn't they suddenly see the light and be forced to buy from us ?
Are you that scared and materialistic that everything must be equally shared out across the whole world, or not be shared at all ? Sounds a bit like (Oooer) communism !
Most of us are adults, and we don't whine when the kids get put first in the queue. Grow the fuck up !
"Contrary to recent reports, One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) is not planning a consumer version of its current XO laptop, designed for the poorest and most remote children in the world," said Nicholas Negroponte, OLPC chairman. He added, "XO will be made available to governments in very large quantities to be given to all children free, as part of the education system."
Maybe the slashbots have difficulty with the difference between designed and destined.
Aren't you being a little too harsh on a person who spent more than 1/3rd of his life's savings in philanthropy
Ordinary people have life savings. I find the image of BG carefully stashing a little of his earnings every week to provide for his old age ludicrous. Most of it is share price.
If he was a true philanthropist and really altruistic, then it wouldn't be called the *Gates* Foundation. Charity is a private thing, not done for bragging points or tax avoidance.
What actually happened was, they said they were going to redistribute the land to the people, but what they actually did, was *destroy* all the infrastructure, the farms, the houses etc. that belonged to the dispossessed "colonials" and replaced it with.... nothing !
The country degenerated almost overnight into a system of warlords and despotism, with the "people" being left with nothing to eat and no way to produce anything for fear of it being stolen at gunpoint by local warlords. Mugabe is 100% to blame for this situation, for being a despotic tyrant. Don't try to blame the current state of Zimbabwe on misplaced idealism.
This is similar to the usual rant about communism, in that people say that communism failed, just look at Russia, when in fact what happened in Russia wasn't communism at all, just another totalitarian system. Italy has had a communist government for years, but I don't see anybody reporting death camps and shootings of "escapees" across the border.
When the British were forced to hand back political power to the Indians, it was done in a much more sensible manner. The existing systems were kept in place, just the decision makers changed. Hence they kept the railway system, the farms, the government machinery. If they had done it the same way as Mugabe, India would still be a mess to this day. Remember, not all the money was being shipped straight out of the country, most of those white people had been born and raised there and that's where they spent the money they made, so it was invested in local infrastructure and amenities. So when Mugabe destroyed everything in Zimbabwe, he was cutting his own peoples nose off to spite their face ! But *he* still ended up rich, funny huh ?
The MPAA didn't upload any copyrighted material. They're seeding garbage files that are labeled as actual content and collecting IPs.
Which makes them guilty of fraud. The MPAA has permission to distribute the copyrighted file, say Kill Bill, but what they actually seeded was a bunch of random junk. So when you downloaded from an authorised distributer and got junk, you had been deceived. There is no marker on torrents saying "this ones legal" or "this ones a rip" but the protocol is not illegal in itself. If you buy spiderman on DVD but when you get it home it's just 1 long FBI warning, you have been defrauded. By the act of them posting the torrent and claiming it is a certain thing, they are acting fraudulently.
They can't have it both ways surely. The seeding must be legal because they have the right to distribute, and they willingly posted the torrent to a place where they knew people could download it, *legally* , but they posted junk so therefore they've committed fraud. If some random punk seeds an illegal copy, but it turns out to be junk, well it's tough, he was illegal anyway, but if the seeder is working within the law, they can't choose which bits of the law they adhere to. Are they responsible for the downloaders wasted bandwidth charges ?
If you are asked to go to a timeshare meeting and they promise you $100 dollars for turning up, which you do, then they give you counterfeit bills, is that legal ? After all, you were getting something for nothing right ?
Is the word wiki trademarked then ? I don't think they claimed to be part of the wikipedia organisation.
Otherwise, way to go - you mentioned the word wikimedia 3 times and wikipedia 6 times in a searchable thread about wikileaks. Lets keep the net relevant !
Slashdot Mirror
You're quite right, Superman Returns is a waste of time.
A server is a piece of software, which provides a service to other pieces of software, whether they are on the same machine or a remote machine. Hence in Linux we have the X server, which provides the GUI to the local machine. It can also be used to provide a GUI to a remote machine. It does not have to be based in a 42U rack !
The pictures you sent to your sister are only pictures of machines that are designed to be more reliable at providing a service to many other remote machines, and also are dedicated to providing that service. If one day she gets hacked and you discover that somebody has installed an FTP server on her machine, how are you going to explain that ? She will most likely think that a server is only a massive pile of boxes somewhere else, never that her lowly little machine is just as capable of acting in that capacity.
i would rather have the Bluray
they were first to propose the idea, they came up with the best format(capacity wise) and they are the only ones to produce a PC-writer AFAIK. I don't care about past mistakes (Sony Media), they produce good shit.
so, you record podcasts to tape do you ?
Explains a lot !
From: Dr. Smolin
Fuck off dweeb !
This message has been scanned by mailscanner
See title.
(no I won't submit - do something stupid for a fucking toy - duh!)
End of message
So, basically, you submit to our leather-clad, arms wielding overlords then, Kent?
That's what powers the clock.
Hot blonde : do you have the time ?
bearman: If you've got a can opener !
They are the only party that are committed to proportional representation. The introduction of PR would do nothing to maintain the Liberals hold over power, but would prevent the other parties from doing so, as they have been doing for generations. Instead we would have a real representation of the peoples wishes. Your table would then read :
Party % of seats %of vote
Labour 35.2 35.2
Tory 32.3 32.3
Liberal 22.0 22.0
Others 10.5 10.5
Couple that with a requirement for a 75% majority to pass legislation, and nothing could be passed without the involvement of all the parties, through alliances and agreements. As the situation currently stands, just over 1/3 of the electorate are effectively dictating to the other 2/3. How can that be democratic ? And politicians wonder why the turnout is so low.
Britain doesn't have a written constitution, so if the government of the day can get something past Parliament, then that's that. What really bugs me is that the Labour Party were supposed to represent the workers, the ordinary people who do all the work, as opposed to the landowners and nobility. And yet they have done more to oppress the workers than any Conservative govt. has ever done.
I think that maybe they've realised that in order to represent the "workers" you must keep them as "workers", otherwise they become naturally more Conservative in outlook. And considering that they have only been in existence as a political party for around 107 years, they learned the tricks quite quickly. Britain saw more growth and social change under the Whigs (Liberals) than they will ever see under Labour.
So to return to your point, I think those present at the signing of the Magna Carta would in fact approve of this kind of legislation, as it allows them to increase their own power over the population, at the expense of the Ruler, who in this day and age is supposed to be the people.
There, fixed that for you.
I've been mulling over a similar project for a while now. Based on the number of outright dangerous and illegal maneuvers I see people perform when driving, I feel that for the law to work, somebody has to give a shit. So, I intend to capture video of the said actions and post them on a web site, together with the time, date and car registration. If the police want to prosecute then the evidence is there. If the culprit wants me to remove the video, then they can pay me to take it down (which will then go to charity). No, that's not blackmail, because the evidence is already public, and I'm not threatening any other actions. If there are any legal ramifications from displaying the licence plate, I'll blank them out for the public area and keep an unexpurgated copy in case the police need the information. I make my living from being on the road, and it is in my, and everybody elses best interests that the rules are followed as far as possible. Thousands die on the roads because people are either ignorant of the rules, or just plain ignorant - that is not acceptable.
Consequences are vital to any laws, otherwise they're just words.
Most of the posts so far are just whining assholes , saying "me, me, me, me, me !". Virtual threats, like "if they don't sell it here, it will create a black market and I'll get one off ebay" or "what good is it without first world (read MY) participation" and "I want one because .... or else".
This whole project has been designed to fulfill a purpose, and that purpose is not to provide yet another gadget for bored geeks. Would any of you complain because the Red Cross don't rush around to your house when you run out of water or food in the fridge ? These devices are being sold to governments to lend to their nations children for education purposes. You are not paying for them, you didn't pay to design them, you have no stake in them whatsoever.
It's ironic that none of you minded there being a disparity in technology between first and third worlds when it was in favour of the first world. Now it's a case of "they shouldn't have it unless we do too !". The same attitude that arose from Kyoto - why should China and India be allowed to burn fossil fuels if we have to cut down ? After all, we've only had that luxury for 200 years or more, why should they get the same chances as us ? After all if we have to use clean technology (based on our mature industries) why shouldn't they suddenly see the light and be forced to buy from us ?
Are you that scared and materialistic that everything must be equally shared out across the whole world, or not be shared at all ? Sounds a bit like (Oooer) communism !
Most of us are adults, and we don't whine when the kids get put first in the queue. Grow the fuck up !
Full quote helps:
Maybe the slashbots have difficulty with the difference between designed and destined.
If he was a true philanthropist and really altruistic, then it wouldn't be called the *Gates* Foundation. Charity is a private thing, not done for bragging points or tax avoidance.
What actually happened was, they said they were going to redistribute the land to the people, but what they actually did, was *destroy* all the infrastructure, the farms, the houses etc. that belonged to the dispossessed "colonials" and replaced it with .... nothing !
The country degenerated almost overnight into a system of warlords and despotism, with the "people" being left with nothing to eat and no way to produce anything for fear of it being stolen at gunpoint by local warlords. Mugabe is 100% to blame for this situation, for being a despotic tyrant. Don't try to blame the current state of Zimbabwe on misplaced idealism.
This is similar to the usual rant about communism, in that people say that communism failed, just look at Russia, when in fact what happened in Russia wasn't communism at all, just another totalitarian system. Italy has had a communist government for years, but I don't see anybody reporting death camps and shootings of "escapees" across the border.
When the British were forced to hand back political power to the Indians, it was done in a much more sensible manner. The existing systems were kept in place, just the decision makers changed. Hence they kept the railway system, the farms, the government machinery. If they had done it the same way as Mugabe, India would still be a mess to this day. Remember, not all the money was being shipped straight out of the country, most of those white people had been born and raised there and that's where they spent the money they made, so it was invested in local infrastructure and amenities. So when Mugabe destroyed everything in Zimbabwe, he was cutting his own peoples nose off to spite their face ! But *he* still ended up rich, funny huh ?
They can't have it both ways surely. The seeding must be legal because they have the right to distribute, and they willingly posted the torrent to a place where they knew people could download it, *legally* , but they posted junk so therefore they've committed fraud. If some random punk seeds an illegal copy, but it turns out to be junk, well it's tough, he was illegal anyway, but if the seeder is working within the law, they can't choose which bits of the law they adhere to. Are they responsible for the downloaders wasted bandwidth charges ?
If you are asked to go to a timeshare meeting and they promise you $100 dollars for turning up, which you do, then they give you counterfeit bills, is that legal ? After all, you were getting something for nothing right ?
You don't have to register, just go here.
Otherwise, way to go - you mentioned the word wikimedia 3 times and wikipedia 6 times in a searchable thread about wikileaks. Lets keep the net relevant !
Don't
throw
bloody
spears
at
me !