sudo and the like don't require the root password.
And desktop distros are generally set up so users can sudo to do anything.
If you were setting them up for the folks I was setting them up for, you wouldn't let users sudo shit either. Might not be the default choice, but you'd change it too if you knew my family and friends.
So Vista isn't so bad one you get a more powerful computer, get used to the slowness and upgrade to Windows 7?
Learn to read dipshit. That's not what he said. It appears that quoting it didn't help your reading comprehension at all. I hate Microsoft but I hate bullshit even more (one of the reasons I hate Microsoft).
You should try having them use Linux. Then, not only do you get "My computer is slow" but you also get "why can't I install..." or "why doesn't the printer work correctly all the time?" or "Why doesn't flash video work well"....
Linux is a tradeoff, in my experience with "older" or non-computer-oriented people, between usability and stability. Stable - yes... no problems with viruses right now, pretty stable as far as the OS goes, etc. Usability? There were issues there. Yes, maybe it's because it's not what they are used to... but I hate to break it to you: most people are happily using what they are used to and don't see the reason they need to spend a week trying to figure out something new just so they can watch a youtube video. It worked before, why do they need to suddenly put so much work into it?
(can't say I blame them:) My time is of interest to me, too.)
Hate to break it? No you don't. Why must you turn this discussion into a house of lies? Break it down, baby, break it down! Sounds perfect to me. Them: "Why can't I do that?" Me: "Because you kept getting viruses in windows. No happy smiley toolbar for you now. Happy smiley toolbar virus incompatible." And as to more work on their part? Why the hell would I care? They're the ones screwing up their machines in the first place and making work for me.
You think they can't kill their ability to use Youtube in windows? So fucking what? Can't watch youtube for a few weeks until new flash comes out for Linux? Me no care. They're gonna be down for at least that long from some dumb shit they did every so often anyway. Break it, baby, break it. Don't hate, just break it. Locking that puppy down is sounding better and better. And don't even get me started with "where did I put those pictures I took?" Aint' no OS born that can fix the insistence of the casual user to store things where he can't find em. Windows search? Sure. If they even know what they called it. Break it to me pal, break it real good. Cause I'm sick of dealing with "my windowses is broke again and I didn't do anything to cause it actually I was fixing it by clicking the "your computer is at risk" link." Ya, break away. Break away. Sorry, do I sound pissed to be unpaid "un-fuck my windows guy? you touched it last!" Why yes, yes I am. Charge 'em you say? Right. Do I blame them for being upset at their lost, shall we say, productivity? Hells ya.
Would it be better to just get 'em a Mac? Probably, but installing Linux is just my time, not my time plus my money. You didn't think they'd buy one for themselves?
Vista ain't bad, and really Win7 isn't as different as Vista was to XP. I tried very hard for 10 years to use Linux. Not any more; it's too much work. When I'm using my computer, I don't want to spend time fiddling with the OS and desktop environment.
Neither do I, it takes enough time to be constantly fixing friends' neighbors' and family's copies of XP & Vista.
Vista is the worst OS I've used since the Windows 3. Perhaps even worse than that. It's a pile of shit with whipped cream on top, and I'm glad it's been replaced with Windows 7.
To be fair to Win 3.0, you weren't really supposed to use it: it was the demo for 3.1 and win for workgroups. You were expected to just give up and revert back to DOS (without going through any "downgrade" process) while waiting for 3.11, which was mostly usable.
I dont think Vista was that bad OS after a little bit more powerful hardware came out and after you got used to it. It feels a bit more sluggish than XP but that's what Win7 improves with their move responsive UI (which is really important thing that always seems to be forgotten - just compare Opera to Firefox)
So Vista isn't so bad one you get a more powerful computer, get used to the slowness and upgrade to Windows 7? Was this supposed to be tongue-in-cheek?
She's a physician at hospital in Iowa, received letter that any employee not receiving flu shot would be terminated. She intended to anyway, but anarchist me says refuse just to stick it to the man. She says no and turn the TV down.
A one sentence summary is vague. Their patent filing is not.
A one sentence summary is brief, their patent filing is not. Both could be vague, but brevity does not necessarily imply vagueness.
As to the patent filing, I think the (modified) adjective I'd choose is "really broad":
"It's a car with 2 or more pairs of wheels, and it might have an electric motor for each pair, and it might be an AC motor or a DC motor, or maybe one AC motor and one DC motor, and then another motor that's not a motor at all but a generator, cause, you know, motor turned by engine is a generator, and the engine could also maybe turn the wheels, and we've got a whole bunch of AC/DC converters, maybe more if we need to do voltage conversion, and a battery, and did we mention this could be used on just one of the pairs of wheels, or the engine on one pair and the motor on the other pair, and maybe a transmission for the engine, and we could preheat the engine -- or not, and we could give it a turbocharger, or we could just give it a turbo and not preheat it, or we could run the engine all the time, or just some of the time, or maybe at a constant speed most of the time. and maybe we'd even preheat the constant-speed engine, ooh and turbo-charge it too, and we could switch between the various motors and the engine, and everybody else is just thinking using the motor-generator-battery-motor in series, but we're so smart that we're doing it in parallel -- and regenerative breaking, don't forget that"
I am reminded of when I "invented" rack-and-pinion steering in 6th grade, after seeing it in a model.
Switherland became part of the Schengen Area on 2008-12-12, which is not exactly âoea few years agoâ. It's less than one year. However, not being a member of the European Union or the European Economic Area, Switzerland is still supposed to check for goods that have to be declared.
On the subject of my non-eventful cross-border treck, one of us screwed up, then. I'd just bought a pair of diamond earrings for my wife, and carried those across the border with me. Not that I left them in Germany or anything, no so harm no foul, right? I did declare them on return to final destination of US.
You can bounce around Europe crossing borders with little more than a wave of your passport and a friendly nod.
A little less, in my experience. While walking around in Basel last December, I didn't even realize that I walked all the way to Germany, until I saw a sign that read "France this way," "Switzerland that way." I used process of elimination to discern my location. On my way back, I located the border by observing the changing proportion of license plates, and finally a change in street sign styles. The only distinctive feature at the frontier was a section of sidewalk being replaced. I wondered if there had been a little shack for border agents once on that spot.
The demise of the print newspaper has a few causes.
3. Most print newspapers have journalist with a very liberal slant, and people don't want that anymore, witness the success of Fox News and online bloggers.
Appeal to Reason was liberal. The Daily Kos is liberal. Air America is liberal. Newspaper-wise, AFAIK, there are no liberal daily newspapers of any appreciable size in the US. It's hard to find a paper left of John Birch.
I take it you have never heard of either the Washington Post or the New York Times?
The demise of the print newspaper has a few causes.
3. Most print newspapers have journalist with a very liberal slant, and people don't want that anymore, witness the success of Fox News and online bloggers.
Appeal to Reason was liberal. The Daily Kos is liberal. Air America is liberal. Newspaper-wise, AFAIK, there are no liberal daily newspapers of any appreciable size in the US. It's hard to find a paper left of John Birch.
Firstly, if a corporation couldn't make a profit anymore then it would "un-incorporate" and possibly a new corporation with a different name and the same people would pop up. I have heard of this happening for smaller limited-liability corporations that specialized in government bid projects and were banned from bidding. They just started over with a new name. The government, local, state or federal, is so bureaucratically constrained that this seems to work most of the time.
I've been thinking about this for a little while now. When I read the story in Wired about people disappearing and trying to start a new life (and the accompanying "find the author" contest), I got to wondering why a person who'd screwed up couldn't just "re-incorporate" themselves and move on. Apparently, it's because our identity is inextricably linked to our physical body, not just our name. If we go to jail, our body is kept there. If we try to evade out debts by changing our name, our creditors will try to track down our body and still try to collect their "pound of flesh" from it.
A corporation can get away with these things because it doesn't have a physical body. Its body is its capitalization. So "jailing" a company would mean restricting the movement of its capital, i.e. its accounts, assets, patent portfolio, land, plant, etc. Locking up a company would therefore look like "nationalizing" it. Shareholders could go right ahead and invest in a new company, but without their old capital.
So you're saying corporations are the new nobility? (not that I'm disagreeing with you). In a country that forbids the very concept of a nobility? Perhaps we should look to French history for guidance in the proper handling of nobility!
That's rather a good way of thinking about it. All the rights of commoners, plus some, and none of the responsibilities. They have ear of the government -- their concerns weigh upon the state much more than the riff-raff. If a company is threatened, it claims how its employees would suffer were it sanctioned, just as a nobleman might cite his responsibilities to his peasants. And of course, most of the money.
Corporations are fined when they are caught breaking the law because, so far, that's all the courts can do. Please explain how anyone can "lockup" a corporation and I'll be the first support it. The whole idea of incorporating is to AVOID personal responsibility. If someone could hold the CEO, or anyone in the company, personally responsible for the actions of a corporation then the whole concept of a corporation becomes mostly useless.
Well exactly. We want to incarcerate the corporation, not the employees. Yes, corporations exist to avoid personal responsibility for the investors, and to some extent for other interested parties. That doesn't mean the corporation itself is not responsible for its actions.
So how do we incarcerate a criminal corp? Incarcerating a person means taking away their freedom of movement, their ability to hold an outside job, their ability to see friends and family at their convenience or do most voluntary activities. We'd have to find a corporate equivalent, like making the company do "prison work" at "prison pay". It could be prevented from all sorts of activities that a "free" corporation could do, like hiring, firing, making deals and purchases without court permission. Obviously these are just top-of-the-head suggestions, and the subject warrants more thought than this.
Now one could argue that this would cripple the corporation and also potentially harm the employees and shareholders, but that's the whole point. That's what happens when we lock up a person. He's not able to hold a job to support his family, potentially causing them financial distress. And his family is probably just as innocent as Joe punchclock. But we lock up natural persons even though it has an adverse effect on their family, community and friends, so one can hardly argue that corps couldn't be treated the same way. When a person commits a crime, we consider that worthy of punishment, even though punishing them may affect the innocent. It's the price of justice, I guess.
I'm already using aluminum foil lining in many of my hats and clothes to protect me from the government transmissions. However, I hadn't heard that Al2O3 was any better than straight aluminum foil.
It seems suspicious that this story would be posted immediately after I began considering papering my walls with foil.
I doubt better. Probably just more practical and economical. Consider how much faster you could mind-control-proof your clothing if you could spray on a coating rather than plating it or beating it on. And if you could impregnate polyester or some other fiber with it, you could do it right at the cloth mill. Of course, paint is also easier to apply than aluminum siding.
But I still think their idea is stupid. A spinoff for government transmission blocking though might be just what the doctor ordered.
From the sounds of it, just about anything below 100 GHz gets blocked. That means cellphones, too.
I have Aluminum siding, and while an alloy rather than a compound, it is effective for blocking GSM and WiFi. I suspect it's probably better, since the idea of the paint is to create a more cost-effective and easier to implement solution than plating a room or whole building. I've got to stand near an unscreened window to make a call. Anyway, it suggests that the range of applications for this paint technology would be rather limited, say to institutions that use mobile computers indoors (and are security freaks) but who don't use mobile telephones.
The the same should apply for tape/cd players, mp3 players, and radios.
Why stop at just phones and gps devices?
My owner's manual recommends just that. I've got a radio with a "scan" button, and the manufacturer suggests I only use it while parked. Ditto the climate control.
Slashdot Mirror
sudo and the like don't require the root password.
And desktop distros are generally set up so users can sudo to do anything.
If you were setting them up for the folks I was setting them up for, you wouldn't let users sudo shit either. Might not be the default choice, but you'd change it too if you knew my family and friends.
So Vista isn't so bad one you get a more powerful computer, get used to the slowness and upgrade to Windows 7?
Learn to read dipshit. That's not what he said. It appears that quoting it didn't help your reading comprehension at all. I hate Microsoft but I hate bullshit even more (one of the reasons I hate Microsoft).
Comprehend this, dumbass.
And I have no doubt that you'd be doing exactly the same if they were running Linux. No amount of technology can overcome user error.
No root password is a damn good start, though.
You should try having them use Linux. Then, not only do you get "My computer is slow" but you also get "why can't I install ..." or "why doesn't the printer work correctly all the time?" or "Why doesn't flash video work well" ....
Linux is a tradeoff, in my experience with "older" or non-computer-oriented people, between usability and stability. Stable - yes... no problems with viruses right now, pretty stable as far as the OS goes, etc. Usability? There were issues there. Yes, maybe it's because it's not what they are used to... but I hate to break it to you: most people are happily using what they are used to and don't see the reason they need to spend a week trying to figure out something new just so they can watch a youtube video. It worked before, why do they need to suddenly put so much work into it?
(can't say I blame them :) My time is of interest to me, too.)
Hate to break it? No you don't. Why must you turn this discussion into a house of lies? Break it down, baby, break it down! Sounds perfect to me. Them: "Why can't I do that?" Me: "Because you kept getting viruses in windows. No happy smiley toolbar for you now. Happy smiley toolbar virus incompatible." And as to more work on their part? Why the hell would I care? They're the ones screwing up their machines in the first place and making work for me.
You think they can't kill their ability to use Youtube in windows? So fucking what? Can't watch youtube for a few weeks until new flash comes out for Linux? Me no care. They're gonna be down for at least that long from some dumb shit they did every so often anyway. Break it, baby, break it. Don't hate, just break it. Locking that puppy down is sounding better and better. And don't even get me started with "where did I put those pictures I took?" Aint' no OS born that can fix the insistence of the casual user to store things where he can't find em. Windows search? Sure. If they even know what they called it. Break it to me pal, break it real good. Cause I'm sick of dealing with "my windowses is broke again and I didn't do anything to cause it actually I was fixing it by clicking the "your computer is at risk" link." Ya, break away. Break away. Sorry, do I sound pissed to be unpaid "un-fuck my windows guy? you touched it last!" Why yes, yes I am. Charge 'em you say? Right. Do I blame them for being upset at their lost, shall we say, productivity? Hells ya.
Would it be better to just get 'em a Mac? Probably, but installing Linux is just my time, not my time plus my money. You didn't think they'd buy one for themselves?
Vista ain't bad, and really Win7 isn't as different as Vista was to XP. I tried very hard for 10 years to use Linux. Not any more; it's too much work. When I'm using my computer, I don't want to spend time fiddling with the OS and desktop environment.
Neither do I, it takes enough time to be constantly fixing friends' neighbors' and family's copies of XP & Vista.
I never had any problems moving from 98 to XP.
Me neither, I skipped both for NT 4 and Win 2000!
But Midnighte's gay for Noone!
Vista is the worst OS I've used since the Windows 3. Perhaps even worse than that. It's a pile of shit with whipped cream on top, and I'm glad it's been replaced with Windows 7.
To be fair to Win 3.0, you weren't really supposed to use it: it was the demo for 3.1 and win for workgroups. You were expected to just give up and revert back to DOS (without going through any "downgrade" process) while waiting for 3.11, which was mostly usable.
I dont think Vista was that bad OS after a little bit more powerful hardware came out and after you got used to it. It feels a bit more sluggish than XP but that's what Win7 improves with their move responsive UI (which is really important thing that always seems to be forgotten - just compare Opera to Firefox)
So Vista isn't so bad one you get a more powerful computer, get used to the slowness and upgrade to Windows 7? Was this supposed to be tongue-in-cheek?
She's a physician at hospital in Iowa, received letter that any employee not receiving flu shot would be terminated. She intended to anyway, but anarchist me says refuse just to stick it to the man. She says no and turn the TV down.
A one sentence summary is vague. Their patent filing is not.
A one sentence summary is brief, their patent filing is not. Both could be vague, but brevity does not necessarily imply vagueness.
As to the patent filing, I think the (modified) adjective I'd choose is "really broad":
"It's a car with 2 or more pairs of wheels, and it might have an electric motor for each pair, and it might be an AC motor or a DC motor, or maybe one AC motor and one DC motor, and then another motor that's not a motor at all but a generator, cause, you know, motor turned by engine is a generator, and the engine could also maybe turn the wheels, and we've got a whole bunch of AC/DC converters, maybe more if we need to do voltage conversion, and a battery, and did we mention this could be used on just one of the pairs of wheels, or the engine on one pair and the motor on the other pair, and maybe a transmission for the engine, and we could preheat the engine -- or not, and we could give it a turbocharger, or we could just give it a turbo and not preheat it, or we could run the engine all the time, or just some of the time, or maybe at a constant speed most of the time. and maybe we'd even preheat the constant-speed engine, ooh and turbo-charge it too, and we could switch between the various motors and the engine, and everybody else is just thinking using the motor-generator-battery-motor in series, but we're so smart that we're doing it in parallel -- and regenerative breaking, don't forget that"
I am reminded of when I "invented" rack-and-pinion steering in 6th grade, after seeing it in a model.
Switherland became part of the Schengen Area on 2008-12-12, which is not exactly âoea few years agoâ. It's less than one year. However, not being a member of the European Union or the European Economic Area, Switzerland is still supposed to check for goods that have to be declared.
On the subject of my non-eventful cross-border treck, one of us screwed up, then. I'd just bought a pair of diamond earrings for my wife, and carried those across the border with me. Not that I left them in Germany or anything, no so harm no foul, right? I did declare them on return to final destination of US.
You can bounce around Europe crossing borders with little more than a wave of your passport and a friendly nod.
A little less, in my experience. While walking around in Basel last December, I didn't even realize that I walked all the way to Germany, until I saw a sign that read "France this way," "Switzerland that way." I used process of elimination to discern my location. On my way back, I located the border by observing the changing proportion of license plates, and finally a change in street sign styles. The only distinctive feature at the frontier was a section of sidewalk being replaced. I wondered if there had been a little shack for border agents once on that spot.
The demise of the print newspaper has a few causes. 3. Most print newspapers have journalist with a very liberal slant, and people don't want that anymore, witness the success of Fox News and online bloggers.
Appeal to Reason was liberal. The Daily Kos is liberal. Air America is liberal. Newspaper-wise, AFAIK, there are no liberal daily newspapers of any appreciable size in the US. It's hard to find a paper left of John Birch.
I take it you have never heard of either the Washington Post or the New York Times?
I've heard of them both.
The demise of the print newspaper has a few causes. 3. Most print newspapers have journalist with a very liberal slant, and people don't want that anymore, witness the success of Fox News and online bloggers.
Appeal to Reason was liberal. The Daily Kos is liberal. Air America is liberal. Newspaper-wise, AFAIK, there are no liberal daily newspapers of any appreciable size in the US. It's hard to find a paper left of John Birch.
Firstly, if a corporation couldn't make a profit anymore then it would "un-incorporate" and possibly a new corporation with a different name and the same people would pop up. I have heard of this happening for smaller limited-liability corporations that specialized in government bid projects and were banned from bidding. They just started over with a new name. The government, local, state or federal, is so bureaucratically constrained that this seems to work most of the time.
I've been thinking about this for a little while now. When I read the story in Wired about people disappearing and trying to start a new life (and the accompanying "find the author" contest), I got to wondering why a person who'd screwed up couldn't just "re-incorporate" themselves and move on. Apparently, it's because our identity is inextricably linked to our physical body, not just our name. If we go to jail, our body is kept there. If we try to evade out debts by changing our name, our creditors will try to track down our body and still try to collect their "pound of flesh" from it.
A corporation can get away with these things because it doesn't have a physical body. Its body is its capitalization. So "jailing" a company would mean restricting the movement of its capital, i.e. its accounts, assets, patent portfolio, land, plant, etc. Locking up a company would therefore look like "nationalizing" it. Shareholders could go right ahead and invest in a new company, but without their old capital.
This thought is a work in progress.
So you're saying corporations are the new nobility? (not that I'm disagreeing with you). In a country that forbids the very concept of a nobility? Perhaps we should look to French history for guidance in the proper handling of nobility!
That's rather a good way of thinking about it. All the rights of commoners, plus some, and none of the responsibilities. They have ear of the government -- their concerns weigh upon the state much more than the riff-raff. If a company is threatened, it claims how its employees would suffer were it sanctioned, just as a nobleman might cite his responsibilities to his peasants. And of course, most of the money.
Corporations are fined when they are caught breaking the law because, so far, that's all the courts can do. Please explain how anyone can "lockup" a corporation and I'll be the first support it. The whole idea of incorporating is to AVOID personal responsibility. If someone could hold the CEO, or anyone in the company, personally responsible for the actions of a corporation then the whole concept of a corporation becomes mostly useless.
Well exactly. We want to incarcerate the corporation, not the employees. Yes, corporations exist to avoid personal responsibility for the investors, and to some extent for other interested parties. That doesn't mean the corporation itself is not responsible for its actions.
So how do we incarcerate a criminal corp? Incarcerating a person means taking away their freedom of movement, their ability to hold an outside job, their ability to see friends and family at their convenience or do most voluntary activities. We'd have to find a corporate equivalent, like making the company do "prison work" at "prison pay". It could be prevented from all sorts of activities that a "free" corporation could do, like hiring, firing, making deals and purchases without court permission. Obviously these are just top-of-the-head suggestions, and the subject warrants more thought than this.
Now one could argue that this would cripple the corporation and also potentially harm the employees and shareholders, but that's the whole point. That's what happens when we lock up a person. He's not able to hold a job to support his family, potentially causing them financial distress. And his family is probably just as innocent as Joe punchclock. But we lock up natural persons even though it has an adverse effect on their family, community and friends, so one can hardly argue that corps couldn't be treated the same way. When a person commits a crime, we consider that worthy of punishment, even though punishing them may affect the innocent. It's the price of justice, I guess.
You could use a fine metal mesh instead of paint for the windows.
You may be on to something there. Might be additional benefits too, like keeping insects and vermin out but allowing fresh air in.
May not be better but it could be more, how shall we say, stylish.
You callin' my aluminum siding unfashionable? It's space-age, man!
I'm already using aluminum foil lining in many of my hats and clothes to protect me from the government transmissions. However, I hadn't heard that Al2O3 was any better than straight aluminum foil.
It seems suspicious that this story would be posted immediately after I began considering papering my walls with foil.
I doubt better. Probably just more practical and economical. Consider how much faster you could mind-control-proof your clothing if you could spray on a coating rather than plating it or beating it on. And if you could impregnate polyester or some other fiber with it, you could do it right at the cloth mill. Of course, paint is also easier to apply than aluminum siding.
But I still think their idea is stupid. A spinoff for government transmission blocking though might be just what the doctor ordered.
From the sounds of it, just about anything below 100 GHz gets blocked. That means cellphones, too.
I have Aluminum siding, and while an alloy rather than a compound, it is effective for blocking GSM and WiFi. I suspect it's probably better, since the idea of the paint is to create a more cost-effective and easier to implement solution than plating a room or whole building. I've got to stand near an unscreened window to make a call. Anyway, it suggests that the range of applications for this paint technology would be rather limited, say to institutions that use mobile computers indoors (and are security freaks) but who don't use mobile telephones.
I'd guess your Countach is safe. But if you wanna trade . . . just to stick it to the man, you know.
Problem solved.
Not quite. From TFA:
The restriction does not apply to navigation systems that do not have a mobile phone function
The the same should apply for tape/cd players, mp3 players, and radios. Why stop at just phones and gps devices?
My owner's manual recommends just that. I've got a radio with a "scan" button, and the manufacturer suggests I only use it while parked. Ditto the climate control.