Ugh, you are either a shill or just socially retarded. There is no "right" or "left" and has not been for well over 30 years. Bush's policies have not change under Obama. Clinton's policies did not change under Bush. The left right paradigm is a fiction, and it's painfully obvious to anyone that looks that it's fiction.
There has been a massive push in this country toward either fascism, oligarchy, or socialism depending on what you wish to focus on. That push has not come from the people, but from a very minor group in power working against the will of the people. Main stream media works overtime to keep people in the dark and ignorant to what's been happening. The internet is awesome, because now you don't have to rely on the media to see what's going on. You do however need to be brave enough to face cognitive dissonance and look around.
To back my point about you being a shill or socially retarded, even by main stream standards Obama is "left" and not from the right. Right wing was Ron Paul who was ignored or simply called too crazy to lead by the corrupt media. Romney, who was propped up as a contender was just as left as Obama. If that does not tell you that the left right paradigm is fantasy, I have no idea what will. Then again, as mentioned before you could be a shill.
I think the complaint is based on the perception that visual distraction is way worse than any other form of distraction while driving. The problem of course, is that we know that visual processing is not the only inhibitor.
Think of all the times you almost caused an accident when emotionally distressed for example. I can name a dozen easily, where I was so (insert emotional state like angry, excited, sad) where I simply lost focus on the road. Talking while driving may invoke a similar emotional responses, even if a service is translating the speak to text.
That example out of the way, there are numerous other situations where I have been similarly distracted. Thinking about a problem I needed to solve, sometimes coming up with that solution while driving.
So I agree with the person that visual distraction bad, but he neglects the fact that visual distraction is not the only distraction people face while driving.
According to the threads I read, all are vulnerable. Since the binary is not changed on disk, vidating checksums won't detect this. They really did not go into much detail in any of the reading I got following TFA three levels deep. No versions, no rigs, no mods, etc.. Did you read outside of TFA that it was CPA el only? Sittin in the dr office now, have to read more when back at the office.
The agnostic motto is "Oh God if there is one, save my soul if there is one.". Agnostic is not a lack of care, it's a lack of information. Many people search regularly and actively for that information. In other words, your statement is biased. Remove the "i don't care" and the definition would be fair.
No, it makes you a person that fails to recognize their own beliefs as beliefs. You invent non-existent creatures to prove that you don't believe that a God exists. Worse, you see absolutely no problem with that logic. To top that off, you imply that if you can't see something you must rely on your belief system for it to continue to exist.
Claiming everything but 1 is atheism is absolutely false. 3 is called agnostic, 4 would be a rather ignorant person in this day and age. Possible? Not really, though you may not be able to map their beliefs to a common Religion. Most isolated tribes we have found have beliefs in reincarnation and spirits.
It's also important to note that the question "do you believe in god(s)?" is different from "does a god or gods exist?" Atheism is defined by belief, and not by the tenability of any of its philosophical assertions.
Nonsense, because the questions are purely philosophical. If they were scientifically provable either way, we'd have much less "I'm right", "no I'm right", "no I'm right".
Your last paragraph was answered in the thread better than I could answer it.
You are confusing knowing a symptom with knowing a cause. We are making progress, but you can't really call what we have now knowledge. Look at how people are classified for medication. It's laughable. Most of the medications are not sugar, but their actions and reactions in the body are so wild and varied that you can't really call that knowledge.
There is a whole lot of write ups by scientists on how the current system is horrible. They classify new diseases by common symptoms, all of course treatable with some wonder pill. Your child want's to play? Here is a pill, now you can watch TV in peace. Your child can't pay attention? No need for discipline, here is a pill.
Sure, there are some very real illnesses. We may even have some real medications for a hand full. For the most part though? Our methods of diagnosis and treatment often compare to snake oil, often with the same impact as drinking said snake oil.
Statistics do not show that Christians, nor any other Religion for that matter, have a higher rate of illness (mental or physical) compared to atheists. Most militant atheists tend to show the same narcissistic characteristics as the extreme fundamentalist in certain Religions.
Some studies show that certain Religious are far more healthy in all aspects than "atheists". Could this be because their Religion teaches a good diet, moderation, community service (which would increase physical activity), more than it being "Religion" doing it? In other words, you typed out a steaming pile of bias. Nothing factual or worthwhile to anyone or anything except for your ego.
I hate to say this, but I have come to the conclusion that Christianity is one of the biggest scams that has ever been perpetrated on the human race - so far.
This is going to hurt, but I feel the same way about atheism. Atheists are taught that the Universe could just happen, contrary to what we know and observe everywhere else in the Universe. Everything we see and observe has a cause, yet when it comes to the most important event we could discuss you can't ask "where the ball of mass came from for the big bang and how did physics already exist?" or "how did a vacuum just appear with mass, energy, and physics already inside?". The answer from the top atheist propagandist, Lawrence Kraus, is immediately "I don't need some bully in the sky to make the Universe." What? That does not change or answer the questions!
Most atheists are brainwashed into thinking that if they ask about the beginning of the Universe, they are ignorant. Worse, they are taught that anyone asking the question is ignorant. It's a complete appeal to emotion argument to prevent people from asking the questions, which could be the most important you could ever ask (assuming you came to the conclusion that maybe there is such a thing as a creator).
Look, I'm not saying that either side of the argument is right. I'm saying that either _could_ be right. If you don't want to be ridiculed for your beliefs, why would you ridicule someone for theirs? Isn't that one of the many things atheists use as argument to claim how bad Religion is for society? You know, causing division and hostility between people?
It's always easy to point a finger, looking in a mirror is much much harder.
The point made is that most Religions believe that you choose the road you walk on. If you take the wrong path, you don't end up at your desired location. The Bible, Torah, Koran, etc.. is the map with a road clearly marked. It should be rather obvious that if God didn't want you to get to the right place, there would be no map.
Maybe you should try to learn something about Religions before talking bad about them?
I'm not fond of what many Religions teach, but I've become well educated in numerous theologies so that I can intelligently discuss them.
I agree that humans are lazy, I'd even agree that Religion has been used as a control mechanism. The generalization you made is not very general at all, so you should probably go study up on some Religions. A couple hundred years ago, sure there was more fear involved. At the same time, there was a lot more fear mongering in general, and not just by Religion.
It would be an extreme minority of Churches in the last few decades that give the old fire and brimstone sermons. Most teach about forgiveness, not even repentance.
I don't think anyone is bothered by that attitude at all. It's when people whine and complain about the commute that they "choose" to have that people pull out the pitchforks.
^ That is what people don't quite get. If you don't like the commute, move closer to work. I live in the Bay area and daily people gripe about the 2 hour commute from the North Bay to South Bay, then the 2 hour commute home. I live 4 miles from work, and have no such issues. 20 minutes by bicycle on a bad day, on the same roads as cars drive. I pay 0 for gas as well as having remarkably good blood pressure and health for my age.
I get why people move out of cities, I really do. Pollution is higher, it's noisier than the suburbs, the yards are not as big, etc... But dang it, if you don't want to make the city a better place and you move out, shut the F&$* up about your commute!
I never claimed the Government was lying, I said that it's a fact our Government spies on people and we have no facts due to classifications for nearly every aspect of our espionage. Therefor, mister lack of basic English reading and comprehension skills, I did not speculate.
Me pointing out facts without the propaganda you normally get does not make my facts incorrect. It makes you look like an imbecile.
You believethat the US spying is all for the greater good. I make no such assumption. I never assumed it was bad either, and if you did go back and read it again.
I'd never insult Einstein by calling you him. I will however call you a Troll if you fail to read and comprehend a second time.
The difference is, in countries like China (and I think #2 is actually Israel, or at least they used to be WAY up there in espionage in the US)...it is state sponsored.
In the US, it is largely left up to the private industry. Any US spying, stays mostly in govt hands, things learned by the US govt isn't given freely to US industries.
Pure speculation, and not even "good" speculation. The fact is, you know very little about what the US Government does with it's data. The reason for this is that nearly all of the spying we do is classified as State secrets. I'd bet you a dozen donuts that the US does way more spying than China. Maybe not domestically, but our foreign espionage would dwarf China.
The difference is really, that you are told that China is full of bad guys. You are told that the US is full of heroes saving the world from Governments like China, Libya, and Egypt. Be very cautious with what you are told! Your belief's may not match reality very closely.
Bigotry runs thick. Don't get too down on people however, most don't see that they are trained to be biased and the education is continued in all forms of media and Govt. propaganda.
Seriously, think about how much time has been spent discussing the "Black vote" vs. the "Hispanic vote" vs "Gay vote", etc... As long as people continue to talk that way, we will maintain learned biases. And the vote discussion is just a fraction of the bias being discussed in all forms of media and politics.
Risky, not really. Remember who owns the media companies. If people are not able to read about reality, they don't know reality. Look at the President of Poland for an example of how media completely controlled the story, and that was a pretty big plane crash. Most of the "free" world had no idea he was anti-EU currency.
It is, just indirectly. Facebook does not care which Government agency buys data, who even who's Government for that matter. I'm sure to keep the money rolling in, they try not to step on any toes (without permission that is)
Most ISPs, even in poor foreign sites, are trained for social engineering. Hell, they may reverse your tactic and have you crying about their 7 starving children by the time you hang up the phone.
The reason Linux has been taking over more and more market in the server area is exactly because they don't have point click requirements As for the "Certified MSCE", it is a joke and everyone knows it.
MS traded flexibility for "easy", they admit that much. They wanted to ensure that anyone could manage anything with a GUI, no need for knowledge. That mentality is a failure, even small shops require a good amount of knowledge to set up and maintain (or you get hacked, perform like a politician).
Unix never died, it just migrated to a different *nix because of how flexible it is. Nearly every appliance doing the same thing MS's highly touted dynamic DNS/DHCP run Linux. Design the interface to make it work the way you want, if you want an interface. Script it to do what you want, if you want it scripted. Write your own code and use the APIs any way you want too. You can't do the same thing with MS, even with "Powershell".
A huge problem in the IT market has been the mind set that monkeys can do things well. Good MS Admins rarely have a MSCE because the actual value among IT people is laughable. If you say you have an RHCE/RHCA people say "wow", if you have a MSCE people hide their computers from you.
Huh? "the reason that MS won was the Microsoft Office Pro Package which bundled Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Access, Viso, and Project." I think you are confused and should check history. The original office was Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and a shitty mail client. Access was there, but it could only talk to it's own Database (weak unstable Paradox clone). Visio did not exist back then. Visio came out much later, and was only purchase by Microsoft a few years back (more than a few, but I'm not going to look up the dates). Visio has always been an additional cost. Project is also a late comer to the game, and was always an additional charge just like Visio. This may be helpful.
Word crashed on any large document. Additionally, you had to purchase "Publisher" if you wanted to set up column based pages like Newspapers or Magazines. Word allowed you to drag and drop images to embed them, and as long as it didn't crash it was easy to make simple docs. The reason Adobe Framemaker has stayed around so long is that it's still better at making complex documents (technical manuals) than Word.
Excel had the same issue. It was easier than Lotus to get data in to cells, but in larger spread sheets it had a habit of crashing. The old saying at work was "save every 5 minutes so you don't lose too much" and many companies had policies that you had to save every X minutes because of it.
MS was easy for an all in 1 product from a single vendor, but those products were not very good compared to the competition. It took half a decade to fix stability problems in their office apps, and longer than that to build in functionality the competitors had before the monopoly put them out of business.
Slashdot Mirror
Ugh, you are either a shill or just socially retarded. There is no "right" or "left" and has not been for well over 30 years. Bush's policies have not change under Obama. Clinton's policies did not change under Bush. The left right paradigm is a fiction, and it's painfully obvious to anyone that looks that it's fiction.
There has been a massive push in this country toward either fascism, oligarchy, or socialism depending on what you wish to focus on. That push has not come from the people, but from a very minor group in power working against the will of the people. Main stream media works overtime to keep people in the dark and ignorant to what's been happening. The internet is awesome, because now you don't have to rely on the media to see what's going on. You do however need to be brave enough to face cognitive dissonance and look around.
To back my point about you being a shill or socially retarded, even by main stream standards Obama is "left" and not from the right. Right wing was Ron Paul who was ignored or simply called too crazy to lead by the corrupt media. Romney, who was propped up as a contender was just as left as Obama. If that does not tell you that the left right paradigm is fantasy, I have no idea what will. Then again, as mentioned before you could be a shill.
I think the complaint is based on the perception that visual distraction is way worse than any other form of distraction while driving. The problem of course, is that we know that visual processing is not the only inhibitor.
Think of all the times you almost caused an accident when emotionally distressed for example. I can name a dozen easily, where I was so (insert emotional state like angry, excited, sad) where I simply lost focus on the road. Talking while driving may invoke a similar emotional responses, even if a service is translating the speak to text.
That example out of the way, there are numerous other situations where I have been similarly distracted. Thinking about a problem I needed to solve, sometimes coming up with that solution while driving.
So I agree with the person that visual distraction bad, but he neglects the fact that visual distraction is not the only distraction people face while driving.
Read TFA, it tells you that the checksum does not change, but you go ahead and think rpm -V will save you
According to the threads I read, all are vulnerable. Since the binary is not changed on disk, vidating checksums won't detect this. They really did not go into much detail in any of the reading I got following TFA three levels deep. No versions, no rigs, no mods, etc.. Did you read outside of TFA that it was CPA el only? Sittin in the dr office now, have to read more when back at the office.
The agnostic motto is "Oh God if there is one, save my soul if there is one.". Agnostic is not a lack of care, it's a lack of information. Many people search regularly and actively for that information. In other words, your statement is biased. Remove the "i don't care" and the definition would be fair.
Does that make me religious?
No, it makes you a person that fails to recognize their own beliefs as beliefs. You invent non-existent creatures to prove that you don't believe that a God exists. Worse, you see absolutely no problem with that logic. To top that off, you imply that if you can't see something you must rely on your belief system for it to continue to exist.
Claiming everything but 1 is atheism is absolutely false. 3 is called agnostic, 4 would be a rather ignorant person in this day and age. Possible? Not really, though you may not be able to map their beliefs to a common Religion. Most isolated tribes we have found have beliefs in reincarnation and spirits.
It's also important to note that the question "do you believe in god(s)?" is different from "does a god or gods exist?" Atheism is defined by belief, and not by the tenability of any of its philosophical assertions.
Nonsense, because the questions are purely philosophical. If they were scientifically provable either way, we'd have much less "I'm right", "no I'm right", "no I'm right".
Your last paragraph was answered in the thread better than I could answer it.
You are confusing knowing a symptom with knowing a cause. We are making progress, but you can't really call what we have now knowledge. Look at how people are classified for medication. It's laughable. Most of the medications are not sugar, but their actions and reactions in the body are so wild and varied that you can't really call that knowledge.
There is a whole lot of write ups by scientists on how the current system is horrible. They classify new diseases by common symptoms, all of course treatable with some wonder pill. Your child want's to play? Here is a pill, now you can watch TV in peace. Your child can't pay attention? No need for discipline, here is a pill.
Sure, there are some very real illnesses. We may even have some real medications for a hand full. For the most part though? Our methods of diagnosis and treatment often compare to snake oil, often with the same impact as drinking said snake oil.
Statistics do not show that Christians, nor any other Religion for that matter, have a higher rate of illness (mental or physical) compared to atheists. Most militant atheists tend to show the same narcissistic characteristics as the extreme fundamentalist in certain Religions.
Some studies show that certain Religious are far more healthy in all aspects than "atheists". Could this be because their Religion teaches a good diet, moderation, community service (which would increase physical activity), more than it being "Religion" doing it? In other words, you typed out a steaming pile of bias. Nothing factual or worthwhile to anyone or anything except for your ego.
I hate to say this, but I have come to the conclusion that Christianity is one of the biggest scams that has ever been perpetrated on the human race - so far.
This is going to hurt, but I feel the same way about atheism. Atheists are taught that the Universe could just happen, contrary to what we know and observe everywhere else in the Universe. Everything we see and observe has a cause, yet when it comes to the most important event we could discuss you can't ask "where the ball of mass came from for the big bang and how did physics already exist?" or "how did a vacuum just appear with mass, energy, and physics already inside?". The answer from the top atheist propagandist, Lawrence Kraus, is immediately "I don't need some bully in the sky to make the Universe." What? That does not change or answer the questions!
Most atheists are brainwashed into thinking that if they ask about the beginning of the Universe, they are ignorant. Worse, they are taught that anyone asking the question is ignorant. It's a complete appeal to emotion argument to prevent people from asking the questions, which could be the most important you could ever ask (assuming you came to the conclusion that maybe there is such a thing as a creator).
Look, I'm not saying that either side of the argument is right. I'm saying that either _could_ be right. If you don't want to be ridiculed for your beliefs, why would you ridicule someone for theirs? Isn't that one of the many things atheists use as argument to claim how bad Religion is for society? You know, causing division and hostility between people?
It's always easy to point a finger, looking in a mirror is much much harder.
The point made is that most Religions believe that you choose the road you walk on. If you take the wrong path, you don't end up at your desired location. The Bible, Torah, Koran, etc.. is the map with a road clearly marked. It should be rather obvious that if God didn't want you to get to the right place, there would be no map.
Maybe you should try to learn something about Religions before talking bad about them?
I'm not fond of what many Religions teach, but I've become well educated in numerous theologies so that I can intelligently discuss them.
I agree that humans are lazy, I'd even agree that Religion has been used as a control mechanism. The generalization you made is not very general at all, so you should probably go study up on some Religions. A couple hundred years ago, sure there was more fear involved. At the same time, there was a lot more fear mongering in general, and not just by Religion.
It would be an extreme minority of Churches in the last few decades that give the old fire and brimstone sermons. Most teach about forgiveness, not even repentance.
I don't think anyone is bothered by that attitude at all. It's when people whine and complain about the commute that they "choose" to have that people pull out the pitchforks.
Maybe they know something you do not? /shrug
mange
/mnj/
Noun
A skin disease of mammals caused by parasitic mites that causes severe itching, hair loss, and the formation of scabs and lesions.
^ That is what people don't quite get. If you don't like the commute, move closer to work. I live in the Bay area and daily people gripe about the 2 hour commute from the North Bay to South Bay, then the 2 hour commute home. I live 4 miles from work, and have no such issues. 20 minutes by bicycle on a bad day, on the same roads as cars drive. I pay 0 for gas as well as having remarkably good blood pressure and health for my age.
I get why people move out of cities, I really do. Pollution is higher, it's noisier than the suburbs, the yards are not as big, etc... But dang it, if you don't want to make the city a better place and you move out, shut the F&$* up about your commute!
I really wish people with mod points would read the guidelines. It would save me from reporting it.
I never claimed the Government was lying, I said that it's a fact our Government spies on people and we have no facts due to classifications for nearly every aspect of our espionage. Therefor, mister lack of basic English reading and comprehension skills, I did not speculate.
Me pointing out facts without the propaganda you normally get does not make my facts incorrect. It makes you look like an imbecile.
You believethat the US spying is all for the greater good. I make no such assumption. I never assumed it was bad either, and if you did go back and read it again.
I'd never insult Einstein by calling you him. I will however call you a Troll if you fail to read and comprehend a second time.
The difference is, in countries like China (and I think #2 is actually Israel, or at least they used to be WAY up there in espionage in the US)...it is state sponsored.
In the US, it is largely left up to the private industry. Any US spying, stays mostly in govt hands, things learned by the US govt isn't given freely to US industries.
Pure speculation, and not even "good" speculation. The fact is, you know very little about what the US Government does with it's data. The reason for this is that nearly all of the spying we do is classified as State secrets. I'd bet you a dozen donuts that the US does way more spying than China. Maybe not domestically, but our foreign espionage would dwarf China.
The difference is really, that you are told that China is full of bad guys. You are told that the US is full of heroes saving the world from Governments like China, Libya, and Egypt. Be very cautious with what you are told! Your belief's may not match reality very closely.
Bigotry runs thick. Don't get too down on people however, most don't see that they are trained to be biased and the education is continued in all forms of media and Govt. propaganda.
Seriously, think about how much time has been spent discussing the "Black vote" vs. the "Hispanic vote" vs "Gay vote", etc... As long as people continue to talk that way, we will maintain learned biases. And the vote discussion is just a fraction of the bias being discussed in all forms of media and politics.
Risky, not really. Remember who owns the media companies. If people are not able to read about reality, they don't know reality. Look at the President of Poland for an example of how media completely controlled the story, and that was a pretty big plane crash. Most of the "free" world had no idea he was anti-EU currency.
It is, just indirectly. Facebook does not care which Government agency buys data, who even who's Government for that matter. I'm sure to keep the money rolling in, they try not to step on any toes (without permission that is)
Most ISPs, even in poor foreign sites, are trained for social engineering. Hell, they may reverse your tactic and have you crying about their 7 starving children by the time you hang up the phone.
The reason Linux has been taking over more and more market in the server area is exactly because they don't have point click requirements As for the "Certified MSCE", it is a joke and everyone knows it.
MS traded flexibility for "easy", they admit that much. They wanted to ensure that anyone could manage anything with a GUI, no need for knowledge. That mentality is a failure, even small shops require a good amount of knowledge to set up and maintain (or you get hacked, perform like a politician).
Unix never died, it just migrated to a different *nix because of how flexible it is. Nearly every appliance doing the same thing MS's highly touted dynamic DNS/DHCP run Linux. Design the interface to make it work the way you want, if you want an interface. Script it to do what you want, if you want it scripted. Write your own code and use the APIs any way you want too. You can't do the same thing with MS, even with "Powershell".
A huge problem in the IT market has been the mind set that monkeys can do things well. Good MS Admins rarely have a MSCE because the actual value among IT people is laughable. If you say you have an RHCE/RHCA people say "wow", if you have a MSCE people hide their computers from you.
Huh? "the reason that MS won was the Microsoft Office Pro Package which bundled Word, Excel, Powerpoint, Access, Viso, and Project." I think you are confused and should check history. The original office was Word, Excel, Powerpoint, and a shitty mail client. Access was there, but it could only talk to it's own Database (weak unstable Paradox clone). Visio did not exist back then. Visio came out much later, and was only purchase by Microsoft a few years back (more than a few, but I'm not going to look up the dates). Visio has always been an additional cost. Project is also a late comer to the game, and was always an additional charge just like Visio. This may be helpful.
Word crashed on any large document. Additionally, you had to purchase "Publisher" if you wanted to set up column based pages like Newspapers or Magazines. Word allowed you to drag and drop images to embed them, and as long as it didn't crash it was easy to make simple docs. The reason Adobe Framemaker has stayed around so long is that it's still better at making complex documents (technical manuals) than Word.
Excel had the same issue. It was easier than Lotus to get data in to cells, but in larger spread sheets it had a habit of crashing. The old saying at work was "save every 5 minutes so you don't lose too much" and many companies had policies that you had to save every X minutes because of it.
MS was easy for an all in 1 product from a single vendor, but those products were not very good compared to the competition. It took half a decade to fix stability problems in their office apps, and longer than that to build in functionality the competitors had before the monopoly put them out of business.