No, I'd track down the source and then have them dealt with, but that's not the point, if you work on high voltages without testing/safty checks then you deserve to be fried.
And what if the line tests fine, but powers up once you're actually working on it? Solar/wind power tends to fluctuate a bit...
Actually, if you read the book "A beatiful mind", Sylvia Nassar has corroboating stories of Nash's invention in 1949 - after Piet Hein's invention, but before it was marketed by Parker brothers. It was apparently a bit of a fad there at the time.
Wow, did you even read KnightNavro said before you took the quotes out of context? Here's the originals, with emphasis:
Or the kid who "hates Jesus Christ"* (because he chooses not to praise the same god) in a small school on the Bible belt
Now, it's clear(to me, at least), that the kid simply chose not to praise God, and the "good christian children" around him decided that meant he hated Jesus, God, and everything else that was good and decent - in other words, ran to unwarrented conclusions. It seems he was doing just what you described yourself as doing in the Catholic church - "just stand respectfully". How would you like it if you were sitting in your Catholic church, someone noticed you weren't praying to the Virgin Mary, and everyone got on your case about "hating Jesus and the Virgin Mary"?
As for the part about growing up in Littleton, I'm guessing that you weren't there for the fateful year when the name became synonymos with tragedy. By all accounts, the religeous ferver has increased tremendously since then, and I wouldn't be suprised if someone was singled out for not being Christian(and loudly proclaiming it).
The problem is completely different. It's not actual unmanned aircraft's capabilities -- they can be easily matched by the enemy that will just make the same thing. It's making the aircraft expendable.
I think you may be right about that - on June 8th, Pakistan shot down an Indian UAV near Lahore, the second-biggest city in Pakistan. (CNN story / CNN photo).
I really doubt that this sort of overflight would have been attempted with a manned plane, not just because of the cost, but also because putting lives at risk like that would indicate you're going to war. How long will it be before we start doing pinpoint strikes against structres and such, without caling it war? Oh, wait, we have - hmm, maybe unmanned weapons might be a bad thing after all.
Jeez. I think you're not seeing the forest for the trees. Zathrus's main point is still valid - a carrier would be a lot harder to kill than depicted, though not impossible. So, let's go over it again -
1) AWACS stands for Air Warning And Control System. It's the name of the Air Force plane, but's it's also a generic term applied to all planes whose mission is to provide radar cover and direct friendly planes. ... 3) Most of it may be classified, but people have been discussing SOP for close to 50 years - the general stuff seems to be known.
4) More nitpicking. ... 7) Submariners refer to their subs as "boats" even if that is grammatically incorrect.
all those orgs counting the innocents being released have been desperatly trying to find an innocent person who had been executed for the last hundred years and they haven't been able to come up with a single case.
Might that be because they're too busy working on current death penalty cases, which have a "deadline", so to speak? Most death penalty opponents seem to focus on a particular case with the aim of saving that person, and once he's been executed, there is little urgency to continue. Keep in mind that in the American system, there is no such thing as 'proven innocent'. You can try to overturn a sentence after someone's dead, but courts are unlikely to hear your case, as they're also busy dealing with current cases. Examples such as the Sam Sheppard case(though not a death penalty case) show that even high-profile cases will not get reviewed by the courts if the defendant is dead. The closest you usually get are things such as these:
In 1990, Jesse Tafero was executed in Florida. He had been convicted in 1976 along with his wife, Sonia Jacobs, for murdering a state trooper. In 1981 Jacobs' death sentence was reduced on appeal to life imprisonment, and 11 years later her conviction was vacated by a federal court. The evidence on which Tafero and Jacobs had been convicted and sentenced was identical; it consisted mainly of the perjured testimony of an ex-convict who turned state's witness in order to avoid a death sentence. Had Tafero been alive in 1992, he no doubt would have been released along with Jacobs. Tafero's death is probably the clearest case in recent years of the execution of an innocent person. (from the ACLDU).
If you want more number than that, how about this:
A study published in 1982 in the Stanford Law Review documents 350 capital convictions in which it was later proven that the convict had not committed the crime. Of those, 23 convicts were executed; others spent decades of their lives in prison. In a 1996 update of this study it was revealed that in the past few years alone, four individuals were executed although there was strong evidence that they were not guilty of the crime for which they were condemned.
(from the ACLU
Okay, simple question: how does killing these people make society safer, if they're already convicted and sitting in jail? It seems to me that taking a "life means life" approach, where a life sentence means you spend the rest of your life in jail unless your conviction is overturned, is the most reasonable approach to murder and violent crime.
Oh, please. The ruling was based on the supposed threat created by the website. Note that other pro-life/anti-choice sites that are not as violent have not been found unlawful. Trying to claim it's because of their politics is just wrong.
And what do you do the next day when you haven't fed the hungry? Oh my god! Some of aren't there anymore!
I might agree with your sentiment that one of the major causes of hunger are bad/corrupt regimes, but...
If a revolution happened overnight in one of these "unfree/uncapitalist" countries, it would still take years for a stable economy to develop. Meanwhile, people will be dying.
Well, maybe... but have you seen any Nike ads lately? Most of them are not about the shoes, or the company; most of them are about the spirit of athleticism, or the drive to win, or some other abstract ideal. The idea, of corse, is to associate the company with said ideals, without having to explain how your brand of shoes affects such matters as the spirit of competition. I've heard it said that the best advertising works on a purely emotional level, bypassing normal reason, and I believe Nike ads tend to reinforce that.
But we've put the Autobots on alert, just in case.
Too bad, it'd be funny seeing Ashcorft announce the FBI's new 10 most wanted: "Megatron, Galvatron, Shockwave... These giant robot electronic terroists may be in disguise."
They're 'busy' looking at car magazine porn.
Actually it was the Gundams - it's hard keeping those giant Japanese robot series straight...
In fact, since the cancellation of their show, the Decepticons have straightened out their erronous ways and found gainful employment at MicroSoft Public Relations.
It's interesting that the original poster did not say what subject he was teaching. If my physics teacher had gone on a rant about why MS was bad, it would seem different than if the CS teacher had done so. My CS teacher would occasionally make snide remarks about MS, but it was relevant to the class, as we had to work with their products no matter what we did.
If taken to its logical conclusion, Reality Master's ideals of education would mean that for an Auto Shop teacher to mention how crappy a car company was would be "indoctrination", and for the school newspsper advisor to recommend Adobe products to be "mind control". Hey, do ya think maybe people who have to work with a set of products and have passion for what they do will develop biases for/against said products? Or that those "biases" are part of the teaching process, whether in schools or in industry? Hell, his logic about "brainwashing his kids" could be used against any adult with an opinion, who might come in contact with his kids and "infect" them.
The impression that I get is that Reality Master wants to indoctrinate his kids with his beliefs. Therefore he is jealous of teachers, whom he feels is a threat to his soverign right to mold his kids as he sees fit. Well, guess what? Kids minds aren't blank slates you can write anything to. They can, in fact, make their own decisions about whether something is BS or not. Too bad for Mr. Reality Master there(God, even his name implies his control-freakishness).
Re:Hey I helped a homeless, blind, gay man ...
on
Hacking the Highways
·
· Score: 1
I think a large part of the problem with the "Is it art or not" discussion is that we have been conditioned by everyone from hippie performance artists to critics of said hippies that art cannot be useful. I think this assumption is wrong - some of the coolest "classical" art is in the form of Roman bridges and canals, which have both an aesthetic and functional elegance. Obviously, this guy's feat is nowhere near that - but he didn't claim it was, either.
You sound like you're upset with this guy because you think he's some kind of asshole grabbing underserved attention. I don't think so - what he did is pretty funny, and I would've talked about this kind of stuff if I'd done it. Man, lighten up.
As for building homes in Mexico or feeding the homeless, yes that can be art, it's just that others will not find it as funny as this story.
It appears to be an ad for a ISP or something, called "Hi-Ho". Here is a rough translation of the subtitles at the bottom:
Hi-ho Hi-ho Hi-ho The mail flies Yes! Provider Hi-ho The internet of your dreams - (The pink bear scene) hehehe its name... - (When the guy catches on fire) Hi-ho Connects well - (in the thought ballon: "star") Support #1 - (?) The next-door lady Debuts, too Chat Chat ??? ??? - (Nonsensical stuff when he kicks the rock at the dog) yesyesyesyesyes Hi-ho!
There is no contact info or anything, so I'm just assuming that it's an ISP based on the stuff in the animation. Truly wierd.
Geez, I didn't know UPS took "Fragile" as a challenge;) Does anyone know if FedEx or USPS is better?
Now, how about you put a "Biohazard" sign prominently on the box? "Biohazard" covers everything from used syringes to Anthrax, so it wouldn't be immediately obvious what you're shipping, and I'm sure the employees would treat it with respect, if not outright fear;)
A "Radioactive" might work, but I think there are laws against shipping such materials (or claiming to), and would be less plausible...
Cool, nice to see that debaters are here on Slashdot. How long ago was that, and what was the resolution, exactly? Was that in the NFL, or some other debate league?
Heh, I was in values debate, but I got to debate about nuclear war when it was part of a resolution last year... Fun stuff, I wonder what debaters talked about before 1945?
Re:This has been mentioned before, but...
on
Why not Ruby?
·
· Score: 1
As someone who speaks Japanese natively, and learned English through "immersion" in the U.S., I have some points to add -
1) I think you are confusing the fact that children don't need to know "the rules" in order to learn a language with the idea that there are no such rules. There is no such thing as a language "without rules", excpet perhaps for crude hand gestures and grunts. My mother has more difficulty with English than I do, and that probobly has to do with her age - reaserch seems to show that children can instinctively pick up rules of grammar and other nuances of culture better than adults can. Check the works of Noam Chomsky, for example.
2) Languages can be demonstrated to have some level of rules - just take a sentence or two in some foreign language, and translate it word for word into English - it won't "look right", because it will probobly use different syntax and rules. This does not mean that you can't deviate from them, just that there are traditional and customary ways of arrainging words. The human mind is much more flexible than any computer-language compiler, and can tolerate idiosyncracies and minor variations in grammar.
3) Computer languages are not like natural languages, because natural languages evolved from a need to communicate between human beings, while computer languages are designed only to pass instructions to a computer. If(...)Then(...) phrases are only a small part of a natural language, and human languages encompass everything that humans experience, which is far more than what computers do.
It seems that the original site has taken down the pictures. This is the second time this week that the original site was changed after being posted on Slashdot; the first time, the site had gone down because being slashdotted, it had gone past its bandwidth limits.
Here's an idea for slashdot: how about caching a local copy of the articles cited? Obviously, it'll keep the content from being changed; it'll also make sure that in the older, archived articles, we can still refer to the pages referred, even if it was on a news site that changes content rapidly. Of corse, they should still keep a link to the original site, so people can check the original.
So... does anyone agree? And does anyone have a copy of the pictures so I can see them?:)
So what exactly is the point of blaming an ex-Soviet citizen for the actions of the Soviet Union?
Are you accusing him of having democratically voted his leaders into power? Of having had any say in the workings of his government? You say that "I am too far from the halls of diplomacy, politics, and power to have a realistic idea of what actions are reprehensible, unjustified, excessive, normal, necessary, or unavoidable in these spheres.", but remember, you're a lot closer to the halls of power than he was.
What about thte whole first world war? I thought one of the main reasons the U.S. joined was because of Germany sinking a lot of American freighters? Also, we pulled out of Iraq as soon as Kuwait had been liberated and the oil fields secured, instead of driving to Baghdad - and the political climate seems to be against the costs of peacekeeping missions, let alone invasions.
If I remember correctly, it was an American who invented radio communications - but Americans are stuck with the 'K' and 'W' callsigns, instead of choosing whatever callsign you want, or not using one at all. Why? Because from the start it was clear that radio was going to be used internationally, and needed standards that placed all countries equally, regardless of their economy, government, or contribution to the project. I think it's high time we make U.S..gov,.mil, and others take the.us TLD.
I have a question as to how one would keep their email safe. I use PGPDisk on a WinNT box to encrypt all of my personal files, and I have Eudora installed on the PGPDisk partition; unfortunately, this creates some problems. I have Eudora itself on the PGPDisk instead of just the PGP plug-in because I don't want to have to de-crypt each message when I look thorugh them. However, PGPDisk is sometimes unstable on WinNT, and it is now impossible for me to re-install the Eudora plug-in (to change the version number), because I need PGPDisk open to do so, and the PGP installation prog. won't let me have the PGPDisk partition open when I install. Complicated, huh? Anyone know a better sloution?
I will take the advice given in your.sig - "May you all follow your philosophies to their logical concluision" - and apply it to your obviously sarcastic but amusing post.
So, what happens when we think through that analogy? First, it means that you'll get many perfect scores, from a bunch of people who wouldn't be able to reach that on their own. In other words, you'd get a result that's better than the ability of the person. In a test, this would be bad - but in real life, isn't this good? If every mediocre programmer could copy work from Linus or Alan Cox instead of trying to make it on his own, doesn't that result in a better product?
In the end, your post is interesting because while it slams the Linux programmers, it's actually showing why Open Source is a superior method of development.
Is there software that can communicate with these secure phones? Because that way, they could expand their user base by distributing it as freeware, and it'd also make it harder for governments to destroy or restrict it. Also, how do we know the sofware or hardware in the device hasn't been tampered with, or been compromised by the company themselves? Remember Crypto AG?
Slashdot Mirror
No, I'd track down the source and then have them dealt with, but that's not the point, if you work on high voltages without testing/safty checks then you deserve to be fried.
And what if the line tests fine, but powers up once you're actually working on it? Solar/wind power tends to fluctuate a bit...
Actually, if you read the book "A beatiful mind", Sylvia Nassar has corroboating stories of Nash's invention in 1949 - after Piet Hein's invention, but before it was marketed by Parker brothers. It was apparently a bit of a fad there at the time.
Wow, did you even read KnightNavro said before you took the quotes out of context? Here's the originals, with emphasis:
Or the kid who "hates Jesus Christ"* (because he chooses not to praise the same god) in a small school on the Bible belt
Now, it's clear(to me, at least), that the kid simply chose not to praise God, and the "good christian children" around him decided that meant he hated Jesus, God, and everything else that was good and decent - in other words, ran to unwarrented conclusions. It seems he was doing just what you described yourself as doing in the Catholic church - "just stand respectfully". How would you like it if you were sitting in your Catholic church, someone noticed you weren't praying to the Virgin Mary, and everyone got on your case about "hating Jesus and the Virgin Mary"?
As for the part about growing up in Littleton, I'm guessing that you weren't there for the fateful year when the name became synonymos with tragedy. By all accounts, the religeous ferver has increased tremendously since then, and I wouldn't be suprised if someone was singled out for not being Christian(and loudly proclaiming it).
The problem is completely different. It's not actual unmanned aircraft's capabilities -- they can be easily matched by the enemy that will just make the same thing. It's making the aircraft expendable.
I think you may be right about that - on June 8th, Pakistan shot down an Indian UAV near Lahore, the second-biggest city in Pakistan. (CNN story / CNN photo).
I really doubt that this sort of overflight would have been attempted with a manned plane, not just because of the cost, but also because putting lives at risk like that would indicate you're going to war. How long will it be before we start doing pinpoint strikes against structres and such, without caling it war? Oh, wait, we have - hmm, maybe unmanned weapons might be a bad thing after all.
Jeez. I think you're not seeing the forest for the trees. Zathrus's main point is still valid - a carrier would be a lot harder to kill than depicted, though not impossible. So, let's go over it again -
1) AWACS stands for Air Warning And Control System. It's the name of the Air Force plane, but's it's also a generic term applied to all planes whose mission is to provide radar cover and direct friendly planes.
...
3) Most of it may be classified, but people have been discussing SOP for close to 50 years - the general stuff seems to be known.
4) More nitpicking.
...
7) Submariners refer to their subs as "boats" even if that is grammatically incorrect.
Not that all of this matters, of corse...
all those orgs counting the innocents being released have been desperatly trying to find an innocent person who had been executed for the last hundred years and they haven't been able to come up with a single case.
Might that be because they're too busy working on current death penalty cases, which have a "deadline", so to speak? Most death penalty opponents seem to focus on a particular case with the aim of saving that person, and once he's been executed, there is little urgency to continue. Keep in mind that in the American system, there is no such thing as 'proven innocent'. You can try to overturn a sentence after someone's dead, but courts are unlikely to hear your case, as they're also busy dealing with current cases. Examples such as the Sam Sheppard case(though not a death penalty case) show that even high-profile cases will not get reviewed by the courts if the defendant is dead. The closest you usually get are things such as these:
In 1990, Jesse Tafero was executed in Florida. He had been convicted in 1976 along with his wife, Sonia Jacobs, for murdering a state trooper. In 1981 Jacobs' death sentence was reduced on appeal to life imprisonment, and 11 years later her conviction was vacated by a federal court. The evidence on which Tafero and Jacobs had been convicted and sentenced was identical; it consisted mainly of the perjured testimony of an ex-convict who turned state's witness in order to avoid a death sentence. Had Tafero been alive in 1992, he no doubt would have been released along with Jacobs. Tafero's death is probably the clearest case in recent years of the execution of an innocent person. (from the ACLDU).
If you want more number than that, how about this:
A study published in 1982 in the Stanford Law Review documents 350 capital convictions in which it was later proven that the convict had not committed the crime. Of those, 23 convicts were executed; others spent decades of their lives in prison. In a 1996 update of this study it was revealed that in the past few years alone, four individuals were executed although there was strong evidence that they were not guilty of the crime for which they were condemned. (from the ACLU
Okay, simple question: how does killing these people make society safer, if they're already convicted and sitting in jail? It seems to me that taking a "life means life" approach, where a life sentence means you spend the rest of your life in jail unless your conviction is overturned, is the most reasonable approach to murder and violent crime.
Oh, please. The ruling was based on the supposed threat created by the website. Note that other pro-life/anti-choice sites that are not as violent have not been found unlawful. Trying to claim it's because of their politics is just wrong.
And what do you do the next day when you haven't fed the hungry? Oh my god! Some of aren't there anymore!
I might agree with your sentiment that one of the major causes of hunger are bad/corrupt regimes, but...
If a revolution happened overnight in one of these "unfree/uncapitalist" countries, it would still take years for a stable economy to develop. Meanwhile, people will be dying.
Well, maybe... but have you seen any Nike ads lately? Most of them are not about the shoes, or the company; most of them are about the spirit of athleticism, or the drive to win, or some other abstract ideal. The idea, of corse, is to associate the company with said ideals, without having to explain how your brand of shoes affects such matters as the spirit of competition. I've heard it said that the best advertising works on a purely emotional level, bypassing normal reason, and I believe Nike ads tend to reinforce that.
But we've put the Autobots on alert, just in case.
Too bad, it'd be funny seeing Ashcorft announce the FBI's new 10 most wanted: "Megatron, Galvatron, Shockwave ... These giant robot electronic terroists may be in disguise."
They're 'busy' looking at car magazine porn.
Actually it was the Gundams - it's hard keeping those giant Japanese robot series straight...
In fact, since the cancellation of their show, the Decepticons have straightened out their erronous ways and found gainful employment at MicroSoft Public Relations.
It's interesting that the original poster did not say what subject he was teaching. If my physics teacher had gone on a rant about why MS was bad, it would seem different than if the CS teacher had done so. My CS teacher would occasionally make snide remarks about MS, but it was relevant to the class, as we had to work with their products no matter what we did.
If taken to its logical conclusion, Reality Master's ideals of education would mean that for an Auto Shop teacher to mention how crappy a car company was would be "indoctrination", and for the school newspsper advisor to recommend Adobe products to be "mind control". Hey, do ya think maybe people who have to work with a set of products and have passion for what they do will develop biases for/against said products? Or that those "biases" are part of the teaching process, whether in schools or in industry? Hell, his logic about "brainwashing his kids" could be used against any adult with an opinion, who might come in contact with his kids and "infect" them.
The impression that I get is that Reality Master wants to indoctrinate his kids with his beliefs. Therefore he is jealous of teachers, whom he feels is a threat to his soverign right to mold his kids as he sees fit. Well, guess what? Kids minds aren't blank slates you can write anything to. They can, in fact, make their own decisions about whether something is BS or not. Too bad for Mr. Reality Master there(God, even his name implies his control-freakishness).
I think a large part of the problem with the "Is it art or not" discussion is that we have been conditioned by everyone from hippie performance artists to critics of said hippies that art cannot be useful. I think this assumption is wrong - some of the coolest "classical" art is in the form of Roman bridges and canals, which have both an aesthetic and functional elegance. Obviously, this guy's feat is nowhere near that - but he didn't claim it was, either.
You sound like you're upset with this guy because you think he's some kind of asshole grabbing underserved attention. I don't think so - what he did is pretty funny, and I would've talked about this kind of stuff if I'd done it. Man, lighten up.
As for building homes in Mexico or feeding the homeless, yes that can be art, it's just that others will not find it as funny as this story.
RE:WHAT THE FUCK WAS THAT???
It appears to be an ad for a ISP or something, called "Hi-Ho". Here is a rough translation of the subtitles at the bottom:
Hi-ho
Hi-ho
Hi-ho
The mail flies
Yes!
Provider
Hi-ho
The internet of your dreams - (The pink bear scene)
hehehe its name... - (When the guy catches on fire)
Hi-ho
Connects well - (in the thought ballon: "star")
Support #1 - (?)
The next-door lady
Debuts, too
Chat Chat
???
??? - (Nonsensical stuff when he kicks the rock at the dog)
yesyesyesyesyes
Hi-ho!
There is no contact info or anything, so I'm just assuming that it's an ISP based on the stuff in the animation. Truly wierd.
Geez, I didn't know UPS took "Fragile" as a challenge ;) Does anyone know if FedEx or USPS is better?
;)
Now, how about you put a "Biohazard" sign prominently on the box? "Biohazard" covers everything from used syringes to Anthrax, so it wouldn't be immediately obvious what you're shipping, and I'm sure the employees would treat it with respect, if not outright fear
A "Radioactive" might work, but I think there are laws against shipping such materials (or claiming to), and would be less plausible...
Cool, nice to see that debaters are here on Slashdot. How long ago was that, and what was the resolution, exactly? Was that in the NFL, or some other debate league?
Heh, I was in values debate, but I got to debate about nuclear war when it was part of a resolution last year... Fun stuff, I wonder what debaters talked about before 1945?
As someone who speaks Japanese natively, and learned English through "immersion" in the U.S., I have some points to add -
1) I think you are confusing the fact that children don't need to know "the rules" in order to learn a language with the idea that there are no such rules. There is no such thing as a language "without rules", excpet perhaps for crude hand gestures and grunts. My mother has more difficulty with English than I do, and that probobly has to do with her age - reaserch seems to show that children can instinctively pick up rules of grammar and other nuances of culture better than adults can. Check the works of Noam Chomsky, for example.
2) Languages can be demonstrated to have some level of rules - just take a sentence or two in some foreign language, and translate it word for word into English - it won't "look right", because it will probobly use different syntax and rules. This does not mean that you can't deviate from them, just that there are traditional and customary ways of arrainging words. The human mind is much more flexible than any computer-language compiler, and can tolerate idiosyncracies and minor variations in grammar.
3) Computer languages are not like natural languages, because natural languages evolved from a need to communicate between human beings, while computer languages are designed only to pass instructions to a computer. If(...)Then(...) phrases are only a small part of a natural language, and human languages encompass everything that humans experience, which is far more than what computers do.
It seems that the original site has taken down the pictures. This is the second time this week that the original site was changed after being posted on Slashdot; the first time, the site had gone down because being slashdotted, it had gone past its bandwidth limits.
:)
Here's an idea for slashdot: how about caching a local copy of the articles cited? Obviously, it'll keep the content from being changed; it'll also make sure that in the older, archived articles, we can still refer to the pages referred, even if it was on a news site that changes content rapidly. Of corse, they should still keep a link to the original site, so people can check the original.
So... does anyone agree? And does anyone have a copy of the pictures so I can see them?
So what exactly is the point of blaming an ex-Soviet citizen for the actions of the Soviet Union?
Are you accusing him of having democratically voted his leaders into power? Of having had any say in the workings of his government? You say that "I am too far from the halls of diplomacy, politics, and power to have a realistic idea of what actions are reprehensible, unjustified, excessive, normal, necessary, or unavoidable in these spheres.", but remember, you're a lot closer to the halls of power than he was.
What about thte whole first world war? I thought one of the main reasons the U.S. joined was because of Germany sinking a lot of American freighters? Also, we pulled out of Iraq as soon as Kuwait had been liberated and the oil fields secured, instead of driving to Baghdad - and the political climate seems to be against the costs of peacekeeping missions, let alone invasions.
;)
Anyhow.... what was this topic about, again?
If I remember correctly, it was an American who invented radio communications - but Americans are stuck with the 'K' and 'W' callsigns, instead of choosing whatever callsign you want, or not using one at all. Why? Because from the start it was clear that radio was going to be used internationally, and needed standards that placed all countries equally, regardless of their economy, government, or contribution to the project. I think it's high time we make U.S. .gov, .mil, and others take the .us TLD.
I have a question as to how one would keep their email safe.
I use PGPDisk on a WinNT box to encrypt all of my personal files, and I have Eudora installed on the PGPDisk partition; unfortunately, this creates some problems. I have Eudora itself on the PGPDisk instead of just the PGP plug-in because I don't want to have to de-crypt each message when I look thorugh them. However, PGPDisk is sometimes unstable on WinNT, and it is now impossible for me to re-install the Eudora plug-in (to change the version number), because I need PGPDisk open to do so, and the PGP installation prog. won't let me have the PGPDisk partition open when I install. Complicated, huh? Anyone know a better sloution?
I will take the advice given in your .sig - "May you all follow your philosophies to their logical concluision" - and apply it to your obviously sarcastic but amusing post.
So, what happens when we think through that analogy? First, it means that you'll get many perfect scores, from a bunch of people who wouldn't be able to reach that on their own. In other words, you'd get a result that's better than the ability of the person. In a test, this would be bad - but in real life, isn't this good? If every mediocre programmer could copy work from Linus or Alan Cox instead of trying to make it on his own, doesn't that result in a better product?
In the end, your post is interesting because while it slams the Linux programmers, it's actually showing why Open Source is a superior method of development.
Is there software that can communicate with these secure phones? Because that way, they could expand their user base by distributing it as freeware, and it'd also make it harder for governments to destroy or restrict it. Also, how do we know the sofware or hardware in the device hasn't been tampered with, or been compromised by the company themselves? Remember Crypto AG?