The likely rationale behind the drug dog not being an unreasonable search is that the dog sniffs the air around your car, which is not your property.
I'm sure that when they wrote the Fourth Amendment, the Founding Fathers envisioned citizens being held until a dog can be brought to the area to sniff around your car to smell something that isn't detectable to the human police officers. Sorry, that's just bullshit. By that reasoning, they could search your house under the same pretext. At that point, all you need is a "cooperative" drug dog to manufacture probable cause and the police can search anyone anywhere.
That and you cannot assume that drug dogs will always indicate a positive.
But you can assume that the police will *say* that the dog indicated. What do you think happens if the dog indicates and the cops find nothing? Do you think that these stats are officially kept anywhere? No, they aren't. Actually, what is put in the report is that the dog found "lingering odors of contraband formerly in the vehicle." What are you going to do, depose the dog? In other words, there are no wrong answers.
Since you ask, the last time that I got pulled over was with my wife while we were riding our road bikes on the country roads near where we live.
They are very lightly traveled roads (probably 10 or so cars will pass us during a two-hour ride), so we were riding side-by-side when a large unrestrained dog who has been aggressive with us in the past began barking at us. Although state law permits bikes or motorcycles to be ridden side-by-side, we usually switch to single file when a car approaches from behind, but with our attention focused on the dog, we didn't see the two cars coming up behind us (one regular car followed by a county sheriff). Once we did see them (at most 30 seconds), we moved over and let them pass.
The sheriff, all red-faced, pulled along side of us and shouted "you have pull off the road when cars come up behind you!" This is totally false; bicycles have the same right to the road as any other legal vehicle so I said, "That's not my understanding of the law."
Well, since I had the nerve to disagree with his scholarly interpretation of the law, I was in for some general harassment.
He starts going on about how we were impeding him while he's on official businessthe and how the law doesn't allow us to ride side-by-side and I keep saying that that's not my understanding of the law. He says that he doesn't know the exact statute but, if I give him my name and phone number, he will call me with it. I say that I'm not comfortable with giving him that information.
By this time, another car has come up behind and the sheriff's car is blocking the oncoming lane, so I say, "in any event, I done talking to you, and besides, it looks like you're blocking traffic." Of course, this enrages him and he says something to the effect of "oh, so you think that you're funny?" I say, "what if I do, this isn't the Soviet Union."
At this point, he he pulls up in front of us and gets out and I say, "am I under arrest, or am I free to go?" He says that he is detaining me to give me a ticket, demands my ID and proceeds to his trunk to get out his State Revised Code book to find something to charge me with. We sit there for fifteen minutes and he can't find anything, so he calls into HQ to see if they can figure something out.
Listening to the police radio I could tell that they ran my ID and saw that it was clean. Then they realized that my wife is a prominent professional in town and I was a business owner. I assume that the person at HQ must have realized that they had a little problem on their hands and told the deputy that he better unfuck the situation. So he gets back out of the car and comes back with a whole different attitude saying that "it appears that we (meaning he and I) were both wrong." By that I guess that he meant that he was wrong about the law and I was wrong for insisting on having my rights.
In any event, he let us go, but I couldn't help but wonder if it would have turned out so well if my wife and I weren't both 40-something, white, middle-class, with squeaky-clean records.
I don't believe for a second that you aren't doing something suspicious.
That attitude of yours is exactly how the police get away with this shit. After all if someone gets arrested they must be guilty, right? If someone gets pulled over, there must be a good reason, right? Or maybe it's possible that the police might detain two perfectly law-abiding people doing absolutely nothing illegal, demand to "see their papers" and try to find something to charge them with. And why? Because they had the temerity to insist upon their rights and to "talk back."
Actually yes, the police use any pretext to search your car and person. It usually goes like this:
Officer: Do you have any illegal drugs or weapons in the car?
Citizen: No.
Officer: Then you don't mind me searching your vehicle then?
Citizen: Well actually I do mind.
At this point, the police will either 1)make up probable cause or 2) just bring in a drug dog, who, by the way, will *always* indicate (which means that the dog allegedly smells something). Inexplicably, SCOTUS does not consider a drug dog to be an unreasonable search. Go figure.
Either way, they will then search you and your car. Since they're already pissed because you insisted upon your having your rights observed, there's a good chance that they will plant something on you. If you're lucky, they won't, but I wouldn't count on it.
I hear ya. A customer gave me a LaserJet 1100 five years ago because it was double-feeding paper. It had served as a workgroup printer for five years before that, handling the printing of seven workstations. One free repair kit from HP and a $35 toner cartridge and it's still flawlessly cranking out crisp B&W prints. Heaven knows if it will ever run out of toner.
Before that I had messy, trouble-prone inkjets. I will never go back.
the real question as you have mentioned is how much slack should cops be given in breaking traffic laws. At one end of the scale you have a situation where every breach must be pre-approved at the other end you have a situation where cops can do what they like neither is really desiable.
Hold on. In the US, no one is supposed to be allowed to break laws. That's the whole point of having laws.
The law can have an exemption for certain activities and/or individuals, but no one is supposed to be above the law. Therefore, if police need to run red lights, there better damn well be a provision in the law for it.
Sorry if I seem annoyed; it's not you, it's just that police piss me off.
Point taken but where I come from, one would get their grammatical knuckles rapped for that sort of thing. My Hacker Guide (Diana Hacket, not computer hacker) indicates no such use for their in that context.
In any event, I think that English needs a huge makeover anyway, especially as it pertains to pronouns. Along with gender-neutral pronouns, we need an obvious third-person plural, such as y'all. This is a glaring flaw that causes many misunderstandings.
One of the things that I found recently is a total misunderstanding of an important Bible passage, Luke 22:31. In this passage, Jesus says to Petter, "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat..." Almost everyone I talked to thought that the third person pronoun "you," was singular--it is not. Since I read and write in Spanish, I noticed that it isactually plural ("ustedes").
Either there is some serious wrong doing by MSFT like bribing IT managers and giving kick backs to PC vendors.
I think that the major PC vendors are in bed with MS for the following reason: it gives them a huge advantage against small VAR PC vendors and/or people who would build their own PC.
My company used to build workstations for our customers; we didn't make a profit on them (it's all about the service) but could price them competitively. At this point, with the prices and availability (or lack thereof) we get from our distributors, we would lose money on each PC sold. It's bad enough that we could buy a PC from Dell, take the components out and put them in our own case and sell it for the same price, but Windows pushes us over the edge. Ingram Micro charges us about $132 for XP Pro or Vista, which is far above the price that they charge Dell.
The same goes for home computer builders I imagine. Once one figures in the cost of a MS OS, there's probably no way that one could build a Windows machine for the same or less money. I'm sure that someone will post a response with links to prices for ten different retailers (probably with rebates), but that's just trading time for money.
I'm sorry, but I cannot agree with you on this. The way Mr. de Raadt treats other human beings is simply abusive, and there is no external factor than can explain his behavior in any fashion that would justify coddling it.
The reaction to de Raadt's temper tantrum just goes to show that./ers are like everyone else--they will go to great lengths to rationalize the abberant behavior of one of their own. I wonder how many of the de Raadt apologists would extend the same grace to someone like Ann Coulter, especially with her indefensible "faggot" remark about John Edwards.
The fact is that the more one identifies with another person, the more they will engage in mental gymnastics to excuse bad behavior.
Sorry, but I don't think that is a mitigating factor at all. Nearly everybody I know who is on salary has to put in extra time, go to meetings, work weekends or attend seminars. It's just the way that it is. It sucks, of course, but that's just the way that it goes when you're on salary.
A close friend of mine is a pharmacist and earns $100K/year, working a 44-hour work week. Along with that, they have a mandatory 8-hour meeting every month, an average of 4 hours of uncompensated overtime per week, take home work and continuing education requirements.
As for an education, this person had to get one of the 75 spots in pharmacy school out of 500+ applicants (in other words, a 3.7 or better GPA & excellent SAT scores), go to school for seven years + internships + externships.
So how much should teachers make? If the average is $54K and starting pay is $35K, there are probably senior staff making in excess of $70K. In my estimation, they are paid enough.
The National Writer's Union, which represents freelance writers, said in a statement that Wolf should never have been jailed.
In other news, the RIAA says that music should never be copied, the Postal Worker's Union says that postal workers deserve a raise, and NAMBLA says that old perverts should be free to bugger young boys.
I have to agree with the idea of investing money in teachers instead of the students though.
I am so tired of hearing about how underpaid teachers are. It's like a mantra that people just repeat and repeat without giving a whole lot of thought to. While it holds true for private schools, public school teachers have it pretty good.
Teachers' salaries in Michigan are among the highest in the nation at an average $54,474/year. And that's with an average education just slightly higher than a B.A.. In my area the state university's Teacher's College has the lowest average SAT & GPA of all of the programs in the school.
In addition, they only work 9 months out of the year and have every weekend, holiday and summer off. If a teacher chooses to work the entire year (teaching summer school), like most of us, he/she would make $72K. Add the excellent bennies that most public school employees have and I have a hard time shedding too many tears for them.
Or, alternatively, turn the "open source is a good thing for building your reputation" concept to your advantage: post a "hall of shame" page on your project's web page or in its release notes, that lists the names and all known contact information for people who have caused problems. Ammend your license terms to require that the list be distrubted along with the source for the software.
If you follow this advice, there's a really good chance that you will get sued for libel. Since you could be harming a person's ability to make a living, we could be talking about you being on the hook for a large sum of money. If you post *anything* of the sort, you better be prepared--with some iron-clad proof--to defend your statement in court.
If corporations can outsource labor, why can't I outsource purchase?
You can. But when they go to make a purchase, most people make price the priority--just like companies. Boycotting will never get the momentum necessary to change corporate behavior. It didn't with the "buy American" campaign as it pertained to cars and it won't work now.
I honestly don't know what can be done but I'm willing to entertain the idea of the government taking a hand in this.
Re:Lots slam OSS for being useless and buggy
on
Thailand Bans YouTube
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Absolutely. The/. community reaction to Thailand issues: child prostitution: yeah, yeah, so what? free speech restrictions: yawn... censorship: zzzzzzz... Thailand says OSS is "useless and buggy": WHAT!!!! Those sons of bitches!!
One of my relatives is a brick engineer. Obviously, making bricks is an energy-intensive procedure, so his company builds new brick factories next to garbage dumps, reclaiming the methane to fire the kilns.
Sounds like a win-win situation. We need more clever crap like that.
Dude, why don't you stop this pissing match with Blakey Rat and just admit that you were talking out of your ass with your original assertion? You were wrong; now just be a man and admit it.
Yes, she needs to regain some semblance of self. Based on the couple of comments I saw which were incredibly disgusting and uncalled for, I can see that she would be offended. But really. She needs to get a hold of herself. She calls it mysogyny because someone posts "fuck off you boring slut... i hope someone slits your throat and cums down your gob" on a couple of blogs? Is she new to the internet or something? Name a blog out there that hasn't had even worse repeatedly posted on them. Even directed toward specific individuals? Liberals, conservatives, religious people, atheists, people of different ethnicities and sizes and colors and shapes and views and backgrounds and opinions have things like that said to them online all the time. They don't immediately cancel all events and lock themselves in their home for fear of their life like this person claims she is doing.
Good point. For example, there's some moron on/. that has a sig something to the effect of "be a patriot, murder a Republican." I doubt very seriously that most people who know him personally know that he's such a jackass. He would probably never suggest such a thing in person, much less act upon it.
More than likely, these people who are tormenting this lady are the same: disturbed but impotent people hiding their rage within the anonymity of the web.
It's not like there is really there much else to do in Montana, anyway.
Only if you're a couch potato. But if you have interests and a physical activity level slightly higher than the average/. ectomorph/endomorph, it's hard to be bored. Montana is home to two of the most impressive parks in the world (Yellowstone & Glacier NPs), hiking, biking, rafting, archaeological/paleontological stuff, skiing, etc...
I think that you have hit upon it. A computer behind a NAT firewall can stay uninfected (even without AV software) if a user restricts her/his browsing to the more mainstream segments of the web. From my experience, computers with spyware/malware/trojans/viruses mostly have contracted the problem from at least one of the following ways:
Downloading software or songs with Limewire, Kazaa or other P2P
While I'm aware that there are other ways to get your computer infected, they just don't happen that often. My wife has been using an XP Pro box w/o AV for a couple of years without incident or malware. Her web habits are scrupulous--all she does online is shop and check her yahoo mail account.
In my opinion, the worst thing for a computer is to have a teenager operate it. I reinstall Windows all of the time for people with teenagers and within six months, it's back to be wiped again. Apparently AV & firewall software does no good if you always click "allow."
I take great delight in every installation of Centos that I do.
The last time I purchased RH (three years ago), I called within the 30 days to get some help with printing on an HP LaserJet. A very impatient woman who spoke very poor English gave me some extremely lousy support. Failing to resolve my problem, she dismissively told me that "printing in Linux doesn't work with all printers." Subsequently, I found the fix with a Google search.
Slashdot Mirror
The likely rationale behind the drug dog not being an unreasonable search is that the dog sniffs the air around your car, which is not your property.
I'm sure that when they wrote the Fourth Amendment, the Founding Fathers envisioned citizens being held until a dog can be brought to the area to sniff around your car to smell something that isn't detectable to the human police officers. Sorry, that's just bullshit. By that reasoning, they could search your house under the same pretext. At that point, all you need is a "cooperative" drug dog to manufacture probable cause and the police can search anyone anywhere.
That and you cannot assume that drug dogs will always indicate a positive.
But you can assume that the police will *say* that the dog indicated. What do you think happens if the dog indicates and the cops find nothing? Do you think that these stats are officially kept anywhere? No, they aren't. Actually, what is put in the report is that the dog found "lingering odors of contraband formerly in the vehicle." What are you going to do, depose the dog? In other words, there are no wrong answers.
What the fuck are you people doing?
Since you ask, the last time that I got pulled over was with my wife while we were riding our road bikes on the country roads near where we live.
They are very lightly traveled roads (probably 10 or so cars will pass us during a two-hour ride), so we were riding side-by-side when a large unrestrained dog who has been aggressive with us in the past began barking at us. Although state law permits bikes or motorcycles to be ridden side-by-side, we usually switch to single file when a car approaches from behind, but with our attention focused on the dog, we didn't see the two cars coming up behind us (one regular car followed by a county sheriff). Once we did see them (at most 30 seconds), we moved over and let them pass.
The sheriff, all red-faced, pulled along side of us and shouted "you have pull off the road when cars come up behind you!" This is totally false; bicycles have the same right to the road as any other legal vehicle so I said, "That's not my understanding of the law."
Well, since I had the nerve to disagree with his scholarly interpretation of the law, I was in for some general harassment.
He starts going on about how we were impeding him while he's on official businessthe and how the law doesn't allow us to ride side-by-side and I keep saying that that's not my understanding of the law. He says that he doesn't know the exact statute but, if I give him my name and phone number, he will call me with it. I say that I'm not comfortable with giving him that information.
By this time, another car has come up behind and the sheriff's car is blocking the oncoming lane, so I say, "in any event, I done talking to you, and besides, it looks like you're blocking traffic." Of course, this enrages him and he says something to the effect of "oh, so you think that you're funny?" I say, "what if I do, this isn't the Soviet Union."
At this point, he he pulls up in front of us and gets out and I say, "am I under arrest, or am I free to go?" He says that he is detaining me to give me a ticket, demands my ID and proceeds to his trunk to get out his State Revised Code book to find something to charge me with. We sit there for fifteen minutes and he can't find anything, so he calls into HQ to see if they can figure something out.
Listening to the police radio I could tell that they ran my ID and saw that it was clean. Then they realized that my wife is a prominent professional in town and I was a business owner. I assume that the person at HQ must have realized that they had a little problem on their hands and told the deputy that he better unfuck the situation. So he gets back out of the car and comes back with a whole different attitude saying that "it appears that we (meaning he and I) were both wrong." By that I guess that he meant that he was wrong about the law and I was wrong for insisting on having my rights.
In any event, he let us go, but I couldn't help but wonder if it would have turned out so well if my wife and I weren't both 40-something, white, middle-class, with squeaky-clean records.
I don't believe for a second that you aren't doing something suspicious.
That attitude of yours is exactly how the police get away with this shit. After all if someone gets arrested they must be guilty, right? If someone gets pulled over, there must be a good reason, right? Or maybe it's possible that the police might detain two perfectly law-abiding people doing absolutely nothing illegal, demand to "see their papers" and try to find something to charge them with. And why? Because they had the temerity to insist upon their rights and to "talk back."
Personally, I keep a mini tape recorder in my car in case something like this ever happens to me.
Yeah, well your mini tape recorder will probably get broken when you get pushed (oops, I mean fall) down the police station stairs.
Actually yes, the police use any pretext to search your car and person. It usually goes like this:
Officer: Do you have any illegal drugs or weapons in the car?
Citizen: No.
Officer: Then you don't mind me searching your vehicle then?
Citizen: Well actually I do mind.
At this point, the police will either 1)make up probable cause or 2) just bring in a drug dog, who, by the way, will *always* indicate (which means that the dog allegedly smells something). Inexplicably, SCOTUS does not consider a drug dog to be an unreasonable search. Go figure.
Either way, they will then search you and your car. Since they're already pissed because you insisted upon your having your rights observed, there's a good chance that they will plant something on you. If you're lucky, they won't, but I wouldn't count on it.
P.S. Hey... My first troll-bait post!!! *shakes his own hand*
I hate to break it to you...but that's not your hand that you're shaking.
I hear ya. A customer gave me a LaserJet 1100 five years ago because it was double-feeding paper. It had served as a workgroup printer for five years before that, handling the printing of seven workstations. One free repair kit from HP and a $35 toner cartridge and it's still flawlessly cranking out crisp B&W prints. Heaven knows if it will ever run out of toner.
Before that I had messy, trouble-prone inkjets. I will never go back.
the real question as you have mentioned is how much slack should cops be given in breaking traffic laws. At one end of the scale you have a situation where every breach must be pre-approved at the other end you have a situation where cops can do what they like neither is really desiable.
Hold on. In the US, no one is supposed to be allowed to break laws. That's the whole point of having laws.
The law can have an exemption for certain activities and/or individuals, but no one is supposed to be above the law. Therefore, if police need to run red lights, there better damn well be a provision in the law for it.
Sorry if I seem annoyed; it's not you, it's just that police piss me off.
Yes, of course I am.
Point taken but where I come from, one would get their grammatical knuckles rapped for that sort of thing. My Hacker Guide (Diana Hacket, not computer hacker) indicates no such use for their in that context.
In any event, I think that English needs a huge makeover anyway, especially as it pertains to pronouns. Along with gender-neutral pronouns, we need an obvious third-person plural, such as y'all. This is a glaring flaw that causes many misunderstandings.
One of the things that I found recently is a total misunderstanding of an important Bible passage, Luke 22:31. In this passage, Jesus says to Petter, "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded permission to sift you like wheat..." Almost everyone I talked to thought that the third person pronoun "you," was singular--it is not. Since I read and write in Spanish, I noticed that it isactually plural ("ustedes").
Either there is some serious wrong doing by MSFT like bribing IT managers and giving kick backs to PC vendors.
I think that the major PC vendors are in bed with MS for the following reason: it gives them a huge advantage against small VAR PC vendors and/or people who would build their own PC.
My company used to build workstations for our customers; we didn't make a profit on them (it's all about the service) but could price them competitively. At this point, with the prices and availability (or lack thereof) we get from our distributors, we would lose money on each PC sold. It's bad enough that we could buy a PC from Dell, take the components out and put them in our own case and sell it for the same price, but Windows pushes us over the edge. Ingram Micro charges us about $132 for XP Pro or Vista, which is far above the price that they charge Dell.
The same goes for home computer builders I imagine. Once one figures in the cost of a MS OS, there's probably no way that one could build a Windows machine for the same or less money. I'm sure that someone will post a response with links to prices for ten different retailers (probably with rebates), but that's just trading time for money.
I'm sorry, but I cannot agree with you on this. The way Mr. de Raadt treats other human beings is simply abusive, and there is no external factor than can explain his behavior in any fashion that would justify coddling it.
./ers are like everyone else--they will go to great lengths to rationalize the abberant behavior of one of their own. I wonder how many of the de Raadt apologists would extend the same grace to someone like Ann Coulter, especially with her indefensible "faggot" remark about John Edwards.
The reaction to de Raadt's temper tantrum just goes to show that
The fact is that the more one identifies with another person, the more they will engage in mental gymnastics to excuse bad behavior.
Sorry, but I don't think that is a mitigating factor at all. Nearly everybody I know who is on salary has to put in extra time, go to meetings, work weekends or attend seminars. It's just the way that it is. It sucks, of course, but that's just the way that it goes when you're on salary.
A close friend of mine is a pharmacist and earns $100K/year, working a 44-hour work week. Along with that, they have a mandatory 8-hour meeting every month, an average of 4 hours of uncompensated overtime per week, take home work and continuing education requirements.
As for an education, this person had to get one of the 75 spots in pharmacy school out of 500+ applicants (in other words, a 3.7 or better GPA & excellent SAT scores), go to school for seven years + internships + externships.
So how much should teachers make? If the average is $54K and starting pay is $35K, there are probably senior staff making in excess of $70K. In my estimation, they are paid enough.
Actually I got my info from the American Federation of Teachers. Sorry, it's a pdf.
The National Writer's Union, which represents freelance writers, said in a statement that Wolf should never have been jailed.
In other news, the RIAA says that music should never be copied, the Postal Worker's Union says that postal workers deserve a raise, and NAMBLA says that old perverts should be free to bugger young boys.
I have to agree with the idea of investing money in teachers instead of the students though.
I am so tired of hearing about how underpaid teachers are. It's like a mantra that people just repeat and repeat without giving a whole lot of thought to. While it holds true for private schools, public school teachers have it pretty good.
Teachers' salaries in Michigan are among the highest in the nation at an average $54,474/year. And that's with an average education just slightly higher than a B.A.. In my area the state university's Teacher's College has the lowest average SAT & GPA of all of the programs in the school.
In addition, they only work 9 months out of the year and have every weekend, holiday and summer off. If a teacher chooses to work the entire year (teaching summer school), like most of us, he/she would make $72K. Add the excellent bennies that most public school employees have and I have a hard time shedding too many tears for them.
Or, alternatively, turn the "open source is a good thing for building your reputation" concept to your advantage: post a "hall of shame" page on your project's web page or in its release notes, that lists the names and all known contact information for people who have caused problems. Ammend your license terms to require that the list be distrubted along with the source for the software.
If you follow this advice, there's a really good chance that you will get sued for libel. Since you could be harming a person's ability to make a living, we could be talking about you being on the hook for a large sum of money. If you post *anything* of the sort, you better be prepared--with some iron-clad proof--to defend your statement in court.
If corporations can outsource labor, why can't I outsource purchase?
You can. But when they go to make a purchase, most people make price the priority--just like companies. Boycotting will never get the momentum necessary to change corporate behavior. It didn't with the "buy American" campaign as it pertained to cars and it won't work now.
I honestly don't know what can be done but I'm willing to entertain the idea of the government taking a hand in this.
Absolutely. The /. community reaction to Thailand issues:
child prostitution: yeah, yeah, so what?
free speech restrictions: yawn...
censorship: zzzzzzz...
Thailand says OSS is "useless and buggy": WHAT!!!! Those sons of bitches!!
One of my relatives is a brick engineer. Obviously, making bricks is an energy-intensive procedure, so his company builds new brick factories next to garbage dumps, reclaiming the methane to fire the kilns.
Sounds like a win-win situation. We need more clever crap like that.
Alas, that's probably true...but it's a bargain compared to not knowing if the election is rigged.
Dude, why don't you stop this pissing match with Blakey Rat and just admit that you were talking out of your ass with your original assertion? You were wrong; now just be a man and admit it.
Yes, she needs to regain some semblance of self. Based on the couple of comments I saw which were incredibly disgusting and uncalled for, I can see that she would be offended. But really. She needs to get a hold of herself. She calls it mysogyny because someone posts "fuck off you boring slut... i hope someone slits your throat and cums down your gob" on a couple of blogs? Is she new to the internet or something? Name a blog out there that hasn't had even worse repeatedly posted on them. Even directed toward specific individuals? Liberals, conservatives, religious people, atheists, people of different ethnicities and sizes and colors and shapes and views and backgrounds and opinions have things like that said to them online all the time. They don't immediately cancel all events and lock themselves in their home for fear of their life like this person claims she is doing.
/. that has a sig something to the effect of "be a patriot, murder a Republican." I doubt very seriously that most people who know him personally know that he's such a jackass. He would probably never suggest such a thing in person, much less act upon it.
Good point. For example, there's some moron on
More than likely, these people who are tormenting this lady are the same: disturbed but impotent people hiding their rage within the anonymity of the web.
It's not like there is really there much else to do in Montana, anyway.
/. ectomorph/endomorph, it's hard to be bored. Montana is home to two of the most impressive parks in the world (Yellowstone & Glacier NPs), hiking, biking, rafting, archaeological/paleontological stuff, skiing, etc...
Only if you're a couch potato. But if you have interests and a physical activity level slightly higher than the average
I think that you have hit upon it. A computer behind a NAT firewall can stay uninfected (even without AV software) if a user restricts her/his browsing to the more mainstream segments of the web. From my experience, computers with spyware/malware/trojans/viruses mostly have contracted the problem from at least one of the following ways:
While I'm aware that there are other ways to get your computer infected, they just don't happen that often. My wife has been using an XP Pro box w/o AV for a couple of years without incident or malware. Her web habits are scrupulous--all she does online is shop and check her yahoo mail account.
In my opinion, the worst thing for a computer is to have a teenager operate it. I reinstall Windows all of the time for people with teenagers and within six months, it's back to be wiped again. Apparently AV & firewall software does no good if you always click "allow."
I take great delight in every installation of Centos that I do.
The last time I purchased RH (three years ago), I called within the 30 days to get some help with printing on an HP LaserJet. A very impatient woman who spoke very poor English gave me some extremely lousy support. Failing to resolve my problem, she dismissively told me that "printing in Linux doesn't work with all printers." Subsequently, I found the fix with a Google search.