Oh, and there's also the fact that he was found guilty of first-degree murder, so yes, it's certainly "instead of". The jury also had the option of finding for a lesser charge, involuntary manslaughter, but they felt that not only was the evidence was strong enough to convict, but to also go with the higher charge.
I think you may be confused by the fact that he was allowed to plead down to second-degree murder after he was found guilty. This was most likely done in order to nip any appeals in the bud, and also because the evidence, although convincing, was not something that would remain convincing when the entire trial was compressed into a two-sentence soundbite, which is all most people care to educate themselves with before deciding guilt in their own minds. I think the case for that being a correct assumption has been made pretty well in this thread.
Later, he was sued for killing his children's mother (unsure if they sued or someone sued on their behalf), and repeatedly stated that he killed their mother in order to protect them from her. He lost that too, and was ordered to pay them $60m. If you still have doubt, it's most likely due to being uninformed.
Incorrect, the criteria is "beyond a reasonable doubt". Very, very little can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. For instance, it's not beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was framed, and then coerced into confessing. It's possible. Heck, it's happened. But I don't think it's reasonable to think that's what happened in this case.
Since he did plead guilty, I imagine that at least he was under the impression that there was sufficient evidence to find him guilty, and the most likely reason for that is that he did in fact commit the crime. Unless you've got an argument that's more convincing than a confession that involves producing the hidden body, I fail to see why we should have let him go.
The thing is, the only reason the evidence was iffy at all was because they didn't have a body, whose importance itself is kind of an artifact of law--although it's very important in some cases, I don't think many people would credibly think that Nina just up and left the country and her kids with nothing more than the clothes on her back.
He had a "how to murder your wife and get away with it" book that he purchased right before she went missing, and absolutely no justification for why he was hosing out his car or why the passenger seat was missing. Maybe it looked to you like there was some reason to let him go because your personal standard of proof (instead of the legal one) wasn't met with the extremely filtered view you got of court proceedings (I'd be surprised if you got 5% of the facts that were presented in the courtroom), but the fact is Hans is a murderer, and he got caught. The system worked in this case. It seems an odd choice to criticize the standard of proof used in legal proceedings and then pick an example where you've already been proven wrong.
Seriously. Maybe this kid's dad is different, and he sees it every day, but I know that anything that made my dad cry would have sure as hell traumatized me.
What I don't understand is why you would measure "production" of a gas as a unit of volume. And if you're going to do that, why wouldn't you include the pressure as well? Doesn't this tell us basically nothing, or is there some sort of standard I don't know about?
I mean, this publicity event is a great distraction to the fact that McAfee illegally escaped the country following a murder case where he legitimately was a suspect.
Not that I don't think he did it--to be honest, I'd give it about a 60% chance that he did--but he was never a suspect. He was a "person of interest".
Well, there was that, and the whole agreeing to show them where he hid the body in exchange for a lighter sentence thing.
I guess you could theorize that someone else killed her and he was forced to watch them hide the body for some reason, but that's as crazy as... wait. John McAfee? Is that you?
Seriously. This is an insult to our intelligence. Of course, it'll probably fly because most people haven't had to deal with the inevitable conclusion when they change their mind, or the business isn't growing fast enough and they have to find money somewhere, or enough time has passed that they think they can get away with it, or somebody else is in charge with different notions of what a promise means and is empowered by this clause.
"Oh, no, we won't ever actually do that. It's just in the contract because... uh... well, it's just there! Don't worry about it!"
Even better, write stuff that's hard. Read stuff. Read really complicated stuff, and try to make it do other stuff. Nothing will teach you good programming practices like knowing why you follow them, and nothing will tell you why like seeing the hell that comes of not following them, which any large project is almost guaranteed to contain plenty of examples of. From misnamed or misused variable/functions, to multiple (and therefore slowly diverging) implementations of the same logic, to spending weeks reinventing something already solved in your programming language's standard library because they didn't like the order of arguments on a function, to bringing in a massive overcomplicated framework to solve a simple problem due to a too-strong avoidance of NIH (not that you shouldn't beware of NIH, you just shouldn't let it lead you into trying to pound a space shuttle into a square hole), you'll see it all.
Fix some bugs for a large FOSS project. Pick things that are just slightly over your head, and then pretend someone's breathing down your neck to get it done yesterday. Pick a project where you don't just get to commit changes, find something where your code is reviewed before it's accepted. You'll find a lot of honesty in people that aren't getting paid and don't give a shit about alienating you, and if you can handle a bruised ego you'll learn a lot.
One thing I wouldn't suggest doing is writing code for other people on your own, not right away. It's not that you shouldn't do that eventually, just don't do it when you care more about accomplishing your goal than you do about learning until you've got some good habits firmly established. Otherwise, your bad habits will just become reinforced, since they're usually easier especially when you're only looking at your own code, and to to be honest, you probably don't know the difference between a good habit and a bad habit until you've worked on a large project with a lot of people.
The best thing about working on FOSS projects is, you'll actually be able to demonstrate work to future employers. That goes a long way in an interview or on a resume.
Since we're considering crimes he was indicted for but wasn't found guilty, he should consider himself lucky that he doesn't have to serve time for all the crimes he wasn't indicted for. If he did, he'd be spending eternity in jail!
I'm no tinfoil hatter, and there's a lot more to safety than merely peak power, and there are serious differences in primary input power vs output power aka efficiency, but there's a pretty obvious argument where if you quote the giant machine thats wired to a wall socket 30 amp 440 3-phase ckt as being 4 orders of magnitude lower power than a cellphone that runs for days off a tiny little battery, something is wrong with the numbers beyond simple comparison of wattage.
That is literally the exact form of specious reasoning that tinfoil hatters use. If you're trying to recruit them, good job. That kind of "reasoning" is very appealing to them, since it sounds logical and doesn't require a lot of thought or explanation (or even stand up to it!)
My house is wired to a 20 kW circuit. Therefore, I might as well be sitting inside 20 microwaves as be in my house. Through the power of deductive logic, since I am not burned to a crisp, I am immune to radiation.
Hey Fukushima, I hear you're having some problem cleaning up your reactors...
Speaking of the photos, you'd think that a rag called "gizmag" would know that the usage is "cum" and not "come" as it appears in the caption. I'd give a link, but... well, I'll let someone else search for "cum" at work.
Well, consider: You can either get Windows 7 and be forced to upgrade, and at full price, to Windows 8 in a year or two when most game developers stopped supporting it, or you could get Windows 8.
But please, customer, you have the free choice (*snicker*)!
Yeah, that'd definitely be a concern if it had ever happened before. Thankfully, game developers like to make money, and the ones that don't still haven't quite mastered writing a game engine that depends on features in a version of Windows that won't be out for two years or more.
We'd be told. Stuff big enough to wipe us out is easily visible to amateur astronomers. Just one of those having a moral system that dictates he must tell, or one that will enjoy kicking off the worldwide orgy of sex and murder, and it's out there. The government would have the choice between telling themselves before the amateurs get it out there, in a way they choose, or making it a failed coverup attempt.
Line A is not line B. They're not even the same length! And yet, they're parallel. If you know A1(x, y) A2(x, y) B1(x, y), you can determine the x for any y on line B.
Dogs protect their offspring, humans protect their offspring for much the same reasons. You absolutely can draw parallels for a huge number of behaviors between humans and other animals. Just because exceptions exist (line B isn't as long as line A, so there is no corresponding x coordinate to y+40), doesn't mean you should discard your reasoning and intuitive facilities completely.
It's funny, you can recognize this and yet here you are, planting your flag on Slashdot, on your device made of plastics and rare metals that requires digging deep into the earth to harvest, burning an unrenewable resource that destroys your environment to do it.
I think the fewer characters than base 10 thing is only a secondary benefit at best. The real attraction is that it aligns well with base 2, and takes much fewer characters than base 2. You can look at 0x00080000 and know that the fourth bit of the second word is on, that's a lot harder to do when you're looking at 524288.
Oh, I wasn't trying to say it's likely that you personally were infected, just to make the point that the successful infections are the ones you're most likely to not know about. Virus scanners aren't perfect, and there's a lot of room to hide in the billions of bits on a typical system's RAM, or trillions of bits on their HDDs, or hundreds of thousands to millions of bits per second on a typical net connection. It's the competent malware writers that are really scary, and probably up to the scariest stuff.
But you seem reasonable, so you probably already knew that. Oh, btw, it's "piqued".
Can I say the same about other OSes? I'd say that depends more on how well you know the OS than differences in engineering at this point. My Windows 7 install is the same one I was running since it was released to MSDN subscribers, earlier than its general release 3 years ago. I've had to clean things up from time to time, but I know the OS well enough to clean out old Explorer add-ins and run-on-startup programs, which is the cause of 90% of the slowdowns on old Windows installs. 90% of the remaining 10% is caused by running your filesystem too full without defragmenting. Take care of those two things, and your Windows install can last a long, long time.
I'll certainly concede that it's much harder to know what's really going on with Windows though.
On the Linux side though, I also run Gentoo, I have for the last 8 years or so, and I managed to get hit with a worm that got in through my Roundcube install. This is on a system that is updated weekly, with the hardened make.profile, and official ebuilds for everything. Roundcube was installed with the official ebuild and webapp-config.
It wasn't able to do anything other than write to my temp folder and execute the code it wrote there as the apache account in order to participate in a UDP flood, and the security hole was in Roundcube (which is as typically awful as you'd expect from a PHP app) and not the base install, but the point is, Linux is certainly not immune to viruses or worms, and they do exist, and if you think that it is or they don't, you're fooling yourself. Programmers make mistakes, and many eyes still miss things. More secure by design? Sure, I'll buy that. But applying superlatives like "never" or "immune" is just silly.
First off, no, I don't chew my fingernails (I prefer nail clippers, but I don't think it's particularly odd to do) or eat my own boogers (eew!).
But even if I did, I can recognize that there's a large difference between doing either of those things in private, and eating something you just picked off of your foot while not only in public, but while being recorded, in front of an audience. That's the borderline insane part. Any normal person would immediately be aware of the consequences, and have the self-control to not do it, even if they were gross enough to want to. If you can't see the difference, you should be aware that most people can, and the other responses of disgust you can find in this thread are on the low end of the spectrum of reactions you'd get if you showed this video to people outside the Slashdot community.
For histronics, you should probably take a second look at your own post.
I've been using Linux for well over 15 years, and I've never, NEVER had a virus or malware on my system. I've also been using an Android phone since the original Droid which has also never had malware or a virus on it.
It's not just physically disgusting, it's borderline insane. The entire point of taking someone like RMS's opinion is based on the assumption that he's more informed than the average person, has dedicated more thought to it, and has come to rational conclusions.
I have always had serious trouble with the "rational" part of that in regards to Stallman, and the foot-eating thing only reinforces that. Basic disagreements with his philosophy (in particular the extremist elements of it, the basic idea that software should be free I agree with but we live in a concrete world and our philosophical models aren't perfect so you need to be flexible) aside, I have a real problem delegating any thought at all to someone so unaware or uncaring of social norms.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and there's also the fact that he was found guilty of first-degree murder, so yes, it's certainly "instead of". The jury also had the option of finding for a lesser charge, involuntary manslaughter, but they felt that not only was the evidence was strong enough to convict, but to also go with the higher charge.
I think you may be confused by the fact that he was allowed to plead down to second-degree murder after he was found guilty. This was most likely done in order to nip any appeals in the bud, and also because the evidence, although convincing, was not something that would remain convincing when the entire trial was compressed into a two-sentence soundbite, which is all most people care to educate themselves with before deciding guilt in their own minds. I think the case for that being a correct assumption has been made pretty well in this thread.
Later, he was sued for killing his children's mother (unsure if they sued or someone sued on their behalf), and repeatedly stated that he killed their mother in order to protect them from her. He lost that too, and was ordered to pay them $60m. If you still have doubt, it's most likely due to being uninformed.
Incorrect, the criteria is "beyond a reasonable doubt". Very, very little can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. For instance, it's not beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was framed, and then coerced into confessing. It's possible. Heck, it's happened. But I don't think it's reasonable to think that's what happened in this case.
Since he did plead guilty, I imagine that at least he was under the impression that there was sufficient evidence to find him guilty, and the most likely reason for that is that he did in fact commit the crime. Unless you've got an argument that's more convincing than a confession that involves producing the hidden body, I fail to see why we should have let him go.
The thing is, the only reason the evidence was iffy at all was because they didn't have a body, whose importance itself is kind of an artifact of law--although it's very important in some cases, I don't think many people would credibly think that Nina just up and left the country and her kids with nothing more than the clothes on her back.
He had a "how to murder your wife and get away with it" book that he purchased right before she went missing, and absolutely no justification for why he was hosing out his car or why the passenger seat was missing. Maybe it looked to you like there was some reason to let him go because your personal standard of proof (instead of the legal one) wasn't met with the extremely filtered view you got of court proceedings (I'd be surprised if you got 5% of the facts that were presented in the courtroom), but the fact is Hans is a murderer, and he got caught. The system worked in this case. It seems an odd choice to criticize the standard of proof used in legal proceedings and then pick an example where you've already been proven wrong.
Seriously. Maybe this kid's dad is different, and he sees it every day, but I know that anything that made my dad cry would have sure as hell traumatized me.
What I don't understand is why you would measure "production" of a gas as a unit of volume. And if you're going to do that, why wouldn't you include the pressure as well? Doesn't this tell us basically nothing, or is there some sort of standard I don't know about?
I mean, this publicity event is a great distraction to the fact that McAfee illegally escaped the country following a murder case where he legitimately was a suspect.
Not that I don't think he did it--to be honest, I'd give it about a 60% chance that he did--but he was never a suspect. He was a "person of interest".
Well, there was that, and the whole agreeing to show them where he hid the body in exchange for a lighter sentence thing.
I guess you could theorize that someone else killed her and he was forced to watch them hide the body for some reason, but that's as crazy as ... wait. John McAfee? Is that you?
Yeah, didn't consider that. Geez. A good point from an AC. What the hell happened to /.?
Seriously. This is an insult to our intelligence. Of course, it'll probably fly because most people haven't had to deal with the inevitable conclusion when they change their mind, or the business isn't growing fast enough and they have to find money somewhere, or enough time has passed that they think they can get away with it, or somebody else is in charge with different notions of what a promise means and is empowered by this clause.
"Oh, no, we won't ever actually do that. It's just in the contract because ... uh ... well, it's just there! Don't worry about it!"
Yep. Ain't no other way. Write stuff.
Even better, write stuff that's hard. Read stuff. Read really complicated stuff, and try to make it do other stuff. Nothing will teach you good programming practices like knowing why you follow them, and nothing will tell you why like seeing the hell that comes of not following them, which any large project is almost guaranteed to contain plenty of examples of. From misnamed or misused variable/functions, to multiple (and therefore slowly diverging) implementations of the same logic, to spending weeks reinventing something already solved in your programming language's standard library because they didn't like the order of arguments on a function, to bringing in a massive overcomplicated framework to solve a simple problem due to a too-strong avoidance of NIH (not that you shouldn't beware of NIH, you just shouldn't let it lead you into trying to pound a space shuttle into a square hole), you'll see it all.
Fix some bugs for a large FOSS project. Pick things that are just slightly over your head, and then pretend someone's breathing down your neck to get it done yesterday. Pick a project where you don't just get to commit changes, find something where your code is reviewed before it's accepted. You'll find a lot of honesty in people that aren't getting paid and don't give a shit about alienating you, and if you can handle a bruised ego you'll learn a lot.
One thing I wouldn't suggest doing is writing code for other people on your own, not right away. It's not that you shouldn't do that eventually, just don't do it when you care more about accomplishing your goal than you do about learning until you've got some good habits firmly established. Otherwise, your bad habits will just become reinforced, since they're usually easier especially when you're only looking at your own code, and to to be honest, you probably don't know the difference between a good habit and a bad habit until you've worked on a large project with a lot of people.
The best thing about working on FOSS projects is, you'll actually be able to demonstrate work to future employers. That goes a long way in an interview or on a resume.
Since we're considering crimes he was indicted for but wasn't found guilty, he should consider himself lucky that he doesn't have to serve time for all the crimes he wasn't indicted for. If he did, he'd be spending eternity in jail!
I'm no tinfoil hatter, and there's a lot more to safety than merely peak power, and there are serious differences in primary input power vs output power aka efficiency, but there's a pretty obvious argument where if you quote the giant machine thats wired to a wall socket 30 amp 440 3-phase ckt as being 4 orders of magnitude lower power than a cellphone that runs for days off a tiny little battery, something is wrong with the numbers beyond simple comparison of wattage.
That is literally the exact form of specious reasoning that tinfoil hatters use. If you're trying to recruit them, good job. That kind of "reasoning" is very appealing to them, since it sounds logical and doesn't require a lot of thought or explanation (or even stand up to it!)
My house is wired to a 20 kW circuit. Therefore, I might as well be sitting inside 20 microwaves as be in my house. Through the power of deductive logic, since I am not burned to a crisp, I am immune to radiation.
Hey Fukushima, I hear you're having some problem cleaning up your reactors...
Speaking of the photos, you'd think that a rag called "gizmag" would know that the usage is "cum" and not "come" as it appears in the caption. I'd give a link, but ... well, I'll let someone else search for "cum" at work.
Well, consider: You can either get Windows 7 and be forced to upgrade, and at full price, to Windows 8 in a year or two when most game developers stopped supporting it, or you could get Windows 8.
But please, customer, you have the free choice (*snicker*)!
Yeah, that'd definitely be a concern if it had ever happened before. Thankfully, game developers like to make money, and the ones that don't still haven't quite mastered writing a game engine that depends on features in a version of Windows that won't be out for two years or more.
We'd be told. Stuff big enough to wipe us out is easily visible to amateur astronomers. Just one of those having a moral system that dictates he must tell, or one that will enjoy kicking off the worldwide orgy of sex and murder, and it's out there. The government would have the choice between telling themselves before the amateurs get it out there, in a way they choose, or making it a failed coverup attempt.
What do you suppose they'll pick?
Authentication (who are you), Authorization (what are you allowed to do), and Accounting (what did you do).
Line A is not line B. They're not even the same length! And yet, they're parallel. If you know A1(x, y) A2(x, y) B1(x, y), you can determine the x for any y on line B.
Dogs protect their offspring, humans protect their offspring for much the same reasons. You absolutely can draw parallels for a huge number of behaviors between humans and other animals. Just because exceptions exist (line B isn't as long as line A, so there is no corresponding x coordinate to y+40), doesn't mean you should discard your reasoning and intuitive facilities completely.
It's funny, you can recognize this and yet here you are, planting your flag on Slashdot, on your device made of plastics and rare metals that requires digging deep into the earth to harvest, burning an unrenewable resource that destroys your environment to do it.
"Made on Earth"
I think the fewer characters than base 10 thing is only a secondary benefit at best. The real attraction is that it aligns well with base 2, and takes much fewer characters than base 2. You can look at 0x00080000 and know that the fourth bit of the second word is on, that's a lot harder to do when you're looking at 524288.
Oh, I wasn't trying to say it's likely that you personally were infected, just to make the point that the successful infections are the ones you're most likely to not know about. Virus scanners aren't perfect, and there's a lot of room to hide in the billions of bits on a typical system's RAM, or trillions of bits on their HDDs, or hundreds of thousands to millions of bits per second on a typical net connection. It's the competent malware writers that are really scary, and probably up to the scariest stuff.
But you seem reasonable, so you probably already knew that. Oh, btw, it's "piqued".
Can I say the same about other OSes? I'd say that depends more on how well you know the OS than differences in engineering at this point. My Windows 7 install is the same one I was running since it was released to MSDN subscribers, earlier than its general release 3 years ago. I've had to clean things up from time to time, but I know the OS well enough to clean out old Explorer add-ins and run-on-startup programs, which is the cause of 90% of the slowdowns on old Windows installs. 90% of the remaining 10% is caused by running your filesystem too full without defragmenting. Take care of those two things, and your Windows install can last a long, long time.
I'll certainly concede that it's much harder to know what's really going on with Windows though.
On the Linux side though, I also run Gentoo, I have for the last 8 years or so, and I managed to get hit with a worm that got in through my Roundcube install. This is on a system that is updated weekly, with the hardened make.profile, and official ebuilds for everything. Roundcube was installed with the official ebuild and webapp-config.
It wasn't able to do anything other than write to my temp folder and execute the code it wrote there as the apache account in order to participate in a UDP flood, and the security hole was in Roundcube (which is as typically awful as you'd expect from a PHP app) and not the base install, but the point is, Linux is certainly not immune to viruses or worms, and they do exist, and if you think that it is or they don't, you're fooling yourself. Programmers make mistakes, and many eyes still miss things. More secure by design? Sure, I'll buy that. But applying superlatives like "never" or "immune" is just silly.
First off, no, I don't chew my fingernails (I prefer nail clippers, but I don't think it's particularly odd to do) or eat my own boogers (eew!).
But even if I did, I can recognize that there's a large difference between doing either of those things in private, and eating something you just picked off of your foot while not only in public, but while being recorded, in front of an audience. That's the borderline insane part. Any normal person would immediately be aware of the consequences, and have the self-control to not do it, even if they were gross enough to want to. If you can't see the difference, you should be aware that most people can, and the other responses of disgust you can find in this thread are on the low end of the spectrum of reactions you'd get if you showed this video to people outside the Slashdot community.
For histronics, you should probably take a second look at your own post.
I've been using Linux for well over 15 years, and I've never, NEVER had a virus or malware on my system. I've also been using an Android phone since the original Droid which has also never had malware or a virus on it.
That you know of.
It's not just physically disgusting, it's borderline insane. The entire point of taking someone like RMS's opinion is based on the assumption that he's more informed than the average person, has dedicated more thought to it, and has come to rational conclusions.
I have always had serious trouble with the "rational" part of that in regards to Stallman, and the foot-eating thing only reinforces that. Basic disagreements with his philosophy (in particular the extremist elements of it, the basic idea that software should be free I agree with but we live in a concrete world and our philosophical models aren't perfect so you need to be flexible) aside, I have a real problem delegating any thought at all to someone so unaware or uncaring of social norms.