I heard that bin Laden is on the board of some or many defense contractors. He supposedly has NOT been removed.
If this is true, then it means a WHOOOLLLE lot of people, from the cadge/cabal in the WH all the way down to various defense contractors are in cahoots.
Apparently, OBL is able to hide and survive because maybe he simply owns way too many people who need him a live. Once he's bombed, and assuming no martyrs will surface, then the hunt will effectively wither until someone else purportedly or actually as menacing steps up to be chased by Predators, Raptors, Vipers, Tomahawks, and more.
Moreover, (some in) the Military, until recently, (have) has been standing in line, probably like guys in an eff-fest, just itching for an opportunity to 'expend' all that 'ordnance'. Until Afghanistan and Iraq, lots of missiles and shells have just been in bunkers, on rail cars, or in missile silos aboard ship, or rotating from CVN to AEs etc, unused, unexploded.
There's nothing like firing off real salvos, and unfortunately, war or ass-blasting seem to be akin to intramurals -- ass-kicking in great or grand fashion.
So, if anybody knows on what boards OBL might really sit, and if he's not been ejected, and if his money's not been frozen, the I'll guess that he's needed to be alive to keep ordnance manufacture rolling along.
Pessimistic? Far-fetched?
David Syes
(Linux... Part of increasingly more businesses' daily diets.. Make it part of yours...)
But, I guess that might involve USB connectors, PnP devices...
War Driving..Re:naive wifi technology/config quest
on
Semper WiFi
·
· Score: 1
Why not just put a server in each rifle or helmet?
Each device has a transponder/interrogator, like IFF. Every day, each trooper's helmet or device is reprogrammed via satellite or microwave or by a jet or helo overflight (when tightly-focused reprogs are needed...).
Each unit in proximity to another friendly unit could avoid fratricide (friendly fire) by a tone or visual cue.
If enough sensors are placed on the helmet or at distant ends of a rifle or, if a longer triangulation axis is needed, at the point and rear of a moving or fixed unit, then other units can be moved or augmeted where support is best needed or applied.
Now, if enemies "wardial" on this, they could overwhelm the local CQB (Close Quarter Battle) net just by flooding the presumed spectrum. No need to crack the traffic, just jam or disrupt it with irreconcilable garbage.
Now, others more spectrum/signal knowlegeable can improve upon this ad-hoc idea I presented.
If I give a good idea, I will also present a counter, to level the playing field or to neutralize an advantage. At least everyone will have access to the idea.
I guess that little robot's pecker/drill got dulled humpin' rocks..., or maybe it drilled a rock, couldn't get it off, and maybe instead of a stuck wheel, it's dragging a rock from it's little bit...
It's a sad tray for dolls (had to throw in a Spoonerism...)
Saturday, a friend of mine took his nephews to see "Alien vs Predator". The trailers or something going on said "WhoEVER wins, we LOSE!"
One of the nephews, 9 years old, said, "That's like bush and Kerry; whoever wins we LOSE."
WOW, from a NINE year-old!
Impressive. But, I think we lose more with the current cadge/cabal occupying the Oval Office. If ET landed here and said, "Take me to your leader.", I'd be mortified, for I'd expect an ET to have more intelligence to ask for THEM. I'd probably counter with, "what LEADER?", or "WHAT leader?", or "WHOSE leader?". I don't have one, there are just figureheads, figurines and foolhardy sacks of organic matter shedding skin and making proclamations over in that place.
Now, if ET said, "I/We are here to perform lobotomies..." "How many drill bits did you bring, ET? Are they diamond, corundum, tungsten, carbon-carbon, tungsten-carbide...with thorium tips...? And, which countries are on your list?"
Or, did the US Navy commence a new word usage/useage? I am guessing if it intentionally started from the DOD or CNO (Chief of Naval Operations) or even the TYCOM (Type Commander) or anywere heavy in the chain of command it was probably to differentiate the normal usage so that greater importance (or fear) would be conferred.
If it began because some captain's yeoman had a poor or below-standard grasp of english/English usage/useage, then a bunch of officers on one ship or a shore station thus failed to catch it, and more tellingly, like a virus, the use propagated until it was just part of the culture (sic/pun?).
I think I'll revisit the Dictionary of Naval Terms and reminisce...
David Syes
====== "Linux and Open Source form a healthy part of your computing and personal rights diet -- it includes openness, freedom, flexibility, access, rights to source code, cost reductions, code accountability, code security, nation-building, playing-field-leveling (allowing developing nations to QUICKLY catch up to so-called "super powers (aka SUPER-IP-HOOVERS)), secrecy-breaking, and is not beholden to any one corrupt, deviant, pecuniary, or malfeasant corporation, such as the likes of one (infamous) IP omnivore located in the upper west North American continent, south of a nation named Canada, in a political boundary state named Washington, reportedly named after a "liberating general" who at the time British did/could/would have labeled a terrorist--by today's standards..." (hmmm, too much STTNG "The High Ground
"Why don't you just write "M$" and be done with it? You don't have to condone their business practices to admit that "Microsoft" is the proper spelling of their name, and more than my writing "David Syes" would mean that I think you have any valid points."
---
My perception is that "M$" is too pervasive. It's lost it's full capacity to incite or excite. It contains a diminished level of heretical or harsh display.
By writing "microshaft/microsoft (-shafting and lowercasing/deprecations intentional)" I get to raise the point that there is no law that can compel anyone to properly case a company's name. It might seem spiteful, childish, or unruliness, but if it is pervasive enough, it might import some value on a global scale, especially since there are more words to the quote above. Plus, for those who don't regard the US dollar sign ($) with reverence or hallowed status, m$ migh not go very far.
By stating "lower-casing/deprecation intentional" I can also bring up the right to deprecate a company by a means other than just not buying its products. I get to disparage it in a way it considers itself protect against, namely trademark. Singly, I am not diluting their trademark. But a multitude of readers who adopt my little line could bring the new freshness to greater dispersion. Occasionally, I get people laughing when they see it. These are necessarily "Linux-lovin'" people, but business people who are *doze users, but sort of want to see what Linux will hold in the future for them.
Won't you use my sig-line? (As in: "Won't you try (BUY?) my product?" (Think: Video Professor, pleading for purchasers...)
---- david syes (lower-casing/deprecation intentional, but does not diminish my standing, eternal deprecation of m$)
""in-" is a Latin prefix with a few meanings, two of them being "not" and "without". Examples: indestructible means "not destructible", inanimate means not animate, and incorrect means not correct. It's hardly a stretch to use insecure to mean "not secure", especially since that definition is in pretty much every dictionary you'll ever find."
Anyone remember the "infamous" (heheh) "inflammable"? It probably was one of the scourges of the use of "in-". Now, we just have "flammable", along with a torch. I guess linguistically, in the US, the English usagage didn't go down well. Maybe we states-side had one student too many lighting the Bunsen burne because "inflammable" conferred an unjustified level of safety...
2. Mechanized Sentients/Sentience
Oh yeh,
I forgot about HAL, M-5, The Robot, Data and a slew of others we're working toward. Now, if Honda gets their guy going...... Humans would REALLY be "insecure", and maybe non-secure if the mechanized realize contempt for humans. Especially if a sentient, unstoppable net decides to interfere with Internet transfer of banking wires, and fed/treasury notes transfer orders...
Maybe the Nigerian 419 scammers would have some serious, deadpan, mechanized, "unassimilable" competition...
Thanks, all, for the perspectives. I guess I was fixating on the "precision" of "non-secure".
I had a feeling that some older dictionaries might torpedo me. Good catch, but now, after all these years of hearing "Non-secure line" make/s it difficult to accept the Internet can be "insecure" rather than non-secure, especially, from my perspective, the Internet NEVER was secure. I want to imagine "non-" precluding or indicating the absence of any sense of security at all.
Imagine if definitions become "random" or "randomized". Society would be in tRouBLe...
"If I was 12 and got caught doing something dumb like trying to log in as root like that, I'd just counter with the defense that I got the IP address wrong. "Oh, that waas your server? My buddies must have been playing a joke on me...he said that was his machine.""
But, for that to survive the plausibility (or plausible denial) test, you'd better have a REAL friend whose address is close enough to pass the crossed-fingers test.
------
"To run with the analogy, if a cop sees a kid going down a row of cars testing door handles, he won't just run out and arrest him. The cop will wait until the kid comes across an unlocked door, rummages through the car, and takes something. Then the cop will arrest him. The cop waits because until the kid takes something, it's not a clear cut case."
Some (but not all) cops might see a kid keying a series of car doors, but still watch them, waiting to see if they are going to steal anything or escalate to breaking windows or slashing tires. So, what is worse: Observing for a clear violation, or letting the perp do more damage to cinch an air-tight case?
I almost NEVER proper-case microsoft (lower-casing/deprecation intentional). Sometimes, to get around honoring uppercasing for ms, I just use the initial msie, ms excel, NT4.0, win XP or W2K SP#... This way, it looks like a minor omission.
Hmm, I guess ms will try to use meta tags and other technology to "clean up" documents, especially those that have "microsoft" (lower-casing/deprecation intentional) in them. Or, didn't they try that, only to be blasted for over-reaching into peoples' documents?
When will we get people to correctly use:
-"log on" as a verb and "logon" as the noun?
-"insecure" for emotional states of mind
-"non-secure" regarding the nature of the Internet. The Internet cannot be "insecure", since it is not a sentient/organic/thinking thing.
When I was aboardship/aboard ship, and was Petty Officer of the Watch, I/we answered the landline/land line as "Quarterdeck, USS Flint. Petty Officer Syes Speaking. This is a non-secure line; how may I help you sir, or ma'am?"
Phone lines are never insecure, so why the Internet? I think it was because a bunch of marketers took over the security message aspect of the Internet. Or, some engineers who are FANTASTIC programmers just happened to select the wrong word from the dictionary and it "stuck".
Even "unsecure" might seem better that "insecure".
========= Hmmm... I just ran a "dictionary.com" search on "insecure" and got these:
1. Not sure or certain; doubtful: unemployed and facing an insecure future. 2. Inadequately guarded or protected; unsafe: A shortage of military police made the air base insecure. 3. Not firm or fixed; unsteady: an insecure foothold. 4. Lacking stability; troubled: an insecure relationship. 5. Lacking self-confidence; plagued by anxiety: had always felt insecure at parties.
========
Well, to me, number 2 sounds stupid, as if someone POST-COLDWAR got caught up in the "insecure Internet" description thing.
I guess I'll have to go to pre-Internet boom dictionaries to find out if "insecure" back then was described as in item #2 above...
I recall NT didn't HAVE a hard limit on concurrent clients logging in to the server. Services were widely available to a company.
Then, microshaft realizes, "OH SHIT! We're losing MONEY! We've got to cripple the server and reissue a license...."
Isn't that what happened? Companies having a bonanza of logging in hundreds, maybe a couple thousand (despited crappy response/lethargy) employees were ordered to stop, were forced to submit to restrictive licensing, and were forced to accept hard limits. Drastically, mshaft reduced the concurrent logons, forcing companies to order and license more servers, forcing them to buy more hardware.
If ANYthing ms did for the server market it was to help them sell more iron, iron that didn't need to be sold since the software was originally capable of not require dispersed boxes.
OTOH, given how lousy some services were, it might have been necessary in some cases to go ahead and split the functions across several, if not MANY server boxes.
Slashdot Mirror
I heard that bin Laden is on the board of some or many defense contractors. He supposedly has NOT been removed.
If this is true, then it means a WHOOOLLLE lot of people, from the cadge/cabal in the WH all the way down to various defense contractors are in cahoots.
Apparently, OBL is able to hide and survive because maybe he simply owns way too many people who need him a live. Once he's bombed, and assuming no martyrs will surface, then the hunt will effectively wither until someone else purportedly or actually as menacing steps up to be chased by Predators, Raptors, Vipers, Tomahawks, and more.
Moreover, (some in) the Military, until recently, (have) has been standing in line, probably like guys in an eff-fest, just itching for an opportunity to 'expend' all that 'ordnance'. Until Afghanistan and Iraq, lots of missiles and shells have just been in bunkers, on rail cars, or in missile silos aboard ship, or rotating from CVN to AEs etc, unused, unexploded.
There's nothing like firing off real salvos, and unfortunately, war or ass-blasting seem to be akin to intramurals -- ass-kicking in great or grand fashion.
So, if anybody knows on what boards OBL might really sit, and if he's not been ejected, and if his money's not been frozen, the I'll guess that he's needed to be alive to keep ordnance manufacture rolling along.
Pessimistic? Far-fetched?
David Syes
(Linux... Part of increasingly more businesses' daily diets.. Make it part of yours...)
ViVesection (vivisection)
Troll?
Loll,
lmao
lmgdao
lmmfgdao...
And, if you think THAT's bad, then see:
4 08 19/od_uk_nm/oukoe_life_breasts
Pentagon goes from Ka-Boom, to Da-Bust:
"Pentagon breast implant policy draws fire":
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/200
Well, I don't get called "Atilla da Pun" for nuthin'...
Boston Rectal Implant Project...
But, I guess that might involve USB connectors, PnP devices...
Why not just put a server in each rifle or helmet?
Each device has a transponder/interrogator, like IFF. Every day, each trooper's helmet or device is reprogrammed via satellite or microwave or by a jet or helo overflight (when tightly-focused reprogs are needed...).
Each unit in proximity to another friendly unit could avoid fratricide (friendly fire) by a tone or visual cue.
If enough sensors are placed on the helmet or at distant ends of a rifle or, if a longer triangulation axis is needed, at the point and rear of a moving or fixed unit, then other units can be moved or augmeted where support is best needed or applied.
Now, if enemies "wardial" on this, they could overwhelm the local CQB (Close Quarter Battle) net just by flooding the presumed spectrum. No need to crack the traffic, just jam or disrupt it with irreconcilable garbage.
Now, others more spectrum/signal knowlegeable can improve upon this ad-hoc idea I presented.
If I give a good idea, I will also present a counter, to level the playing field or to neutralize an advantage. At least everyone will have access to the idea.
I guess that little robot's pecker/drill got dulled humpin' rocks..., or maybe it drilled a rock, couldn't get it off, and maybe instead of a stuck wheel, it's dragging a rock from it's little bit...
Just an idea...
I think Captain Kirk is game for this...
Kirk: Are you lonley? Is there anyone like you... on this... planet?
Slim-girl with deadly hands: I am for YOU... James KIRK.
(Kirk-fighting-while-making-whoopee-Music:
thuh-thuh thuh-thuh thuh-thuh thuh-thuh thuh-thuh thuh-thuh thuh...)
David Syes
Gone from liver bad to liver worst...
DOH!!!
I recall a documentary narrator saying:
... ...when the US flag was waving "on the Moon", when or after the astronauts planted it.
"It must be a windy day in Arizona..." (on the movie set...)
David Syes
The funny thing is is that their lawyer just might spell it as:
sieze and deceased...
It's a sad tray for dolls (had to throw in a Spoonerism...)
Saturday, a friend of mine took his nephews to see "Alien vs Predator". The trailers or something going on said "WhoEVER wins, we LOSE!"
One of the nephews, 9 years old, said, "That's like bush and Kerry; whoever wins we LOSE."
WOW, from a NINE year-old!
Impressive. But, I think we lose more with the current cadge/cabal occupying the Oval Office. If ET landed here and said, "Take me to your leader.", I'd be mortified, for I'd expect an ET to have more intelligence to ask for THEM. I'd probably counter with, "what LEADER?", or "WHAT leader?", or "WHOSE leader?". I don't have one, there are just figureheads, figurines and foolhardy sacks of organic matter shedding skin and making proclamations over in that place.
Now, if ET said, "I/We are here to perform lobotomies..." "How many drill bits did you bring, ET? Are they diamond, corundum, tungsten, carbon-carbon, tungsten-carbide...with thorium tips...? And, which countries are on your list?"
David Syes
Alfred E. Newman for President
Or, did the US Navy commence a new word usage/useage? I am guessing if it intentionally started from the DOD or CNO (Chief of Naval Operations) or even the TYCOM (Type Commander) or anywere heavy in the chain of command it was probably to differentiate the normal usage so that greater importance (or fear) would be conferred.
If it began because some captain's yeoman had a poor or below-standard grasp of english/English usage/useage, then a bunch of officers on one ship or a shore station thus failed to catch it, and more tellingly, like a virus, the use propagated until it was just part of the culture (sic/pun?).
I think I'll revisit the Dictionary of Naval Terms
and reminisce...
David Syes
======
"Linux and Open Source form a healthy part of your computing and personal rights diet -- it includes openness, freedom, flexibility, access, rights to source code, cost reductions, code accountability, code security, nation-building, playing-field-leveling (allowing developing nations to QUICKLY catch up to so-called "super powers (aka SUPER-IP-HOOVERS)), secrecy-breaking, and is not beholden to any one corrupt, deviant, pecuniary, or malfeasant corporation, such as the likes of one (infamous) IP omnivore located in the upper west North American continent, south of a nation named Canada, in a political boundary state named Washington, reportedly named after a "liberating general" who at the time British did/could/would have labeled a terrorist--by today's standards..." (hmmm, too much STTNG "The High Ground
http://sttng.epguides.info/?ID=234
)"
=======
"Why don't you just write "M$" and be done with it? You don't have to condone their business practices to admit that "Microsoft" is the proper spelling of their name, and more than my writing "David Syes" would mean that I think you have any valid points."
---
My perception is that "M$" is too pervasive. It's lost it's full capacity to incite or excite. It contains a diminished level of heretical or harsh display.
By writing "microshaft/microsoft (-shafting and lowercasing/deprecations intentional)" I get to raise the point that there is no law that can compel anyone to properly case a company's name. It might seem spiteful, childish, or unruliness, but if it is pervasive enough, it might import some value on a global scale, especially since there are more words to the quote above. Plus, for those who don't regard the US dollar sign ($) with reverence or hallowed status, m$ migh not go very far.
By stating "lower-casing/deprecation intentional" I can also bring up the right to deprecate a company by a means other than just not buying its products. I get to disparage it in a way it considers itself protect against, namely trademark. Singly, I am not diluting their trademark. But a multitude of readers who adopt my little line could bring the new freshness to greater dispersion. Occasionally, I get people laughing when they see it. These are necessarily "Linux-lovin'" people, but business people who are *doze users, but sort of want to see what Linux will hold in the future for them.
Won't you use my sig-line? (As in: "Won't you try (BUY?) my product?" (Think: Video Professor, pleading for purchasers...)
----
david syes (lower-casing/deprecation intentional, but does not diminish my standing, eternal deprecation of m$)
1. Latin, "in-"
... Humans would REALLY be "insecure", and maybe non-secure if the mechanized realize contempt for humans. Especially if a sentient, unstoppable net decides to interfere with Internet transfer of banking wires, and fed/treasury notes transfer orders...
""in-" is a Latin prefix with a few meanings, two of them being "not" and "without". Examples: indestructible means "not destructible", inanimate means not animate, and incorrect means not correct. It's hardly a stretch to use insecure to mean "not secure", especially since that definition is in pretty much every dictionary you'll ever find."
Anyone remember the "infamous" (heheh) "inflammable"? It probably was one of the scourges of the use of "in-". Now, we just have "flammable", along with a torch. I guess linguistically, in the US, the English usagage didn't go down well. Maybe we states-side had one student too many lighting the Bunsen burne because "inflammable" conferred an unjustified level of safety...
2. Mechanized Sentients/Sentience
Oh yeh,
I forgot about HAL, M-5, The Robot, Data and a slew of others we're working toward. Now, if Honda gets their guy going...
Maybe the Nigerian 419 scammers would have some serious, deadpan, mechanized, "unassimilable" competition...
Thanks, all, for the perspectives. I guess I was fixating on the "precision" of "non-secure".
David Syes
Why, reeka!, or Eureka!
I had a feeling that some older dictionaries might torpedo me. Good catch, but now, after all these years of hearing "Non-secure line" make/s it difficult to accept the Internet can be "insecure" rather than non-secure, especially, from my perspective, the Internet NEVER was secure. I want to imagine "non-" precluding or indicating the absence of any sense of security at all.
Imagine if definitions become "random" or "randomized". Society would be in tRouBLe...
"Now, repeat after me..."
WHEW, and I was thinking scheer, heheh:
& q= scheer+nazi&btnG=Search
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8
I guess too much "Rat Patrol" or "A Bridge Too Far", (but not "Abridge too far", heheh).
"Our Leggs, fit your legs -- they HELLLP you they HOLLLD you. They NEH-VUHR let chyooo goh!"
(And, too DAMNED much madison avenue (lower-casing/deprecation intentional)
David Syes
"If I was 12 and got caught doing something dumb like trying to log in as root like that, I'd just counter with the defense that I got the IP address wrong. "Oh, that waas your server? My buddies must have been playing a joke on me...he said that was his machine.""
But, for that to survive the plausibility (or plausible denial) test, you'd better have a REAL friend whose address is close enough to pass the crossed-fingers test.
------
"To run with the analogy, if a cop sees a kid going down a row of cars testing door handles, he won't just run out and arrest him. The cop will wait until the kid comes across an unlocked door, rummages through the car, and takes something. Then the cop will arrest him. The cop waits because until the kid takes something, it's not a clear cut case."
Some (but not all) cops might see a kid keying a series of car doors, but still watch them, waiting to see if they are going to steal anything or escalate to breaking windows or slashing tires. So, what is worse: Observing for a clear violation, or letting the perp do more damage to cinch an air-tight case?
David Syes
I almost NEVER proper-case microsoft (lower-casing/deprecation intentional). Sometimes, to get around honoring uppercasing for ms, I just use the initial msie, ms excel, NT4.0, win XP or W2K SP#... This way, it looks like a minor omission.
Hmm, I guess ms will try to use meta tags and other technology to "clean up" documents, especially those that have "microsoft" (lower-casing/deprecation intentional) in them. Or, didn't they try that, only to be blasted for over-reaching into peoples' documents?
When will we get people to correctly use:
-"log on" as a verb and "logon" as the noun?
-"insecure" for emotional states of mind
-"non-secure" regarding the nature of the Internet. The Internet cannot be "insecure", since it is not a sentient/organic/thinking thing.
When I was aboardship/aboard ship, and was Petty Officer of the Watch, I/we answered the landline/land line as "Quarterdeck, USS Flint. Petty Officer Syes Speaking. This is a non-secure line; how may I help you sir, or ma'am?"
Phone lines are never insecure, so why the Internet? I think it was because a bunch of marketers took over the security message aspect of the Internet. Or, some engineers who are FANTASTIC programmers just happened to select the wrong word from the dictionary and it "stuck".
Even "unsecure" might seem better that "insecure".
=========
Hmmm... I just ran a "dictionary.com" search on "insecure" and got these:
1. Not sure or certain; doubtful: unemployed and facing an insecure future.
2. Inadequately guarded or protected; unsafe: A shortage of military police made the air base insecure.
3. Not firm or fixed; unsteady: an insecure foothold.
4. Lacking stability; troubled: an insecure relationship.
5. Lacking self-confidence; plagued by anxiety: had always felt insecure at parties.
========
Well, to me, number 2 sounds stupid, as if someone POST-COLDWAR got caught up in the "insecure Internet" description thing.
I guess I'll have to go to pre-Internet boom dictionaries to find out if "insecure" back then was described as in item #2 above...
David Syes
I recall from many moons ago reading something that went something like this:
With an infinite number of chimpanzees and an infinite number of typewriters, eventually you'll get "War and Peace".
I wonder if this'll get fast food execs to stop procrastinating taking the worst-offending fatty foods off their menus.
I wonder if those EATING those fatty foods will stop procrastinating taking power walks, going swimming, or the like.
I wonder what other infinite procrastinations might be reversed.
David Syes
Anybody remember when NT first came out?
I recall NT didn't HAVE a hard limit on concurrent clients logging in to the server. Services were widely available to a company.
Then, microshaft realizes, "OH SHIT! We're losing MONEY! We've got to cripple the server and reissue a license...."
Isn't that what happened? Companies having a bonanza of logging in hundreds, maybe a couple thousand (despited crappy response/lethargy) employees were ordered to stop, were forced to submit to restrictive licensing, and were forced to accept hard limits. Drastically, mshaft reduced the concurrent logons, forcing companies to order and license more servers, forcing them to buy more hardware.
If ANYthing ms did for the server market it was to help them sell more iron, iron that didn't need to be sold since the software was originally capable of not require dispersed boxes.
OTOH, given how lousy some services were, it might have been necessary in some cases to go ahead and split the functions across several, if not MANY server boxes.
David Syes
... "I Tiltbot"?
for a second that it said:
"Projecting VOODO on a curved surface."