The real definition is prepubescent. Ages are just there to make it easier to prosecute. And I do argue for a reduction in ages of consent to something more realistic, although not publicly as I'm scared of others' opinions. But there are plenty of people who argue in favour of homosexuality on the internet but are afraid to do so in real life.
I don't believe in a kind and loving God, as I can't believe that such a God would have created a world such as this. If I believe in any kind of God, it's a slightly sadistic, childish one. I mean, surely any reasonably intelligent God would realise all the mess that comes from having many different religions, all with a little bit of support but not outright proof. So why would such a God create a world with this, unless He likes wars and things?
(no karma bonus since this is going to hell, but not a/c because I have no problem saying my sincere beliefs even if they offend people)
We will outgrow them though. What happens when we move beyond the earth? Or when someone invents devices that need lots and lots of addresses (they will happen if the addresses are available). Suggesting a finite number, any finite number, of addresses will be sufficient is silly.
Well, wtf is the program doing processing a document then? Text should be safe, as there is no need for a text document to do things like deleting hard drives or emailing itself to people. Executables and scripts are inherently unsafe, and someone "processing" a script or executable from the internet deserves all they get. But you should be able to "process" a text file without any risk to your computer.
I think that's only the case on early consoles - it's a big issue on the Atari 2600 where you have only 4 ops per pixel, but I didn't think it affected the NES.
Wow. Do you understand the purpose of the scouring of the shire? If you dont just RTFA and get a general summary of what it stands for.
I don't really care about the "purpose", I just know what I thought of the scouring of the shire when I read it. I've read all the books at least five times, and each time I thought "can't he just let it end". And other people I've discussed the books with have said the same thing.
It is a very important chapter that proves the maturity of the hobbits and closes the storyline of Saruman.
Their maturity was already proven with Merry and Pippin going to attack Mordor. They went knowing it was almost certain death, to give Frodo a chance to save the world. What more do you want? As for Saruman, if he really needs to die you could have him killed by wormtounge or one of his orc captains around Isenguard. I don't think he treated any of his subordinates particularly well. And I prefer to have a few loose ends.
BTW. Do you really question the purpose of Tolkien in placing that segment HIS book (I wouldn't consider Tolkien an idiot, and that is what you are calling him)?
I'm not saying he's an idiot, I'm saying he made a mistake with this section. Everyone does. Just because he wrote the book himself and it's very good doesn't mean he can't have done anything wrong. I have no trouble questioning chapters from my favourite authors without considering them idiots. Are you saying good writers are always perfect?
He had a reason whether you see it or not. Any person who creates a language and an entire world is not going to waste his time writing a pointless, unnecessary segement.
Like I said, everyone makes mistakes. He may have had a reason, but regardless of that, the section does not improve the book, if anything it diminishes it. That's my opinion, and it's been the opinion of the two people I've discussed the book in detail with IRL as well. It doesn't make Tolkien an idiot.
I'm not sure when it comes to qmail, but the fact that so many audits have been done and none has found any vulnerabilities suggests strongly that there are no vulnerabilities. Anyway, there is a way to ensure you are 100% secure - mathematical proof. It's a lot of work so it's not done that often, but software just does logic and it's possible to prove that it will only do what it's supposed to do, hence no security holes.
Sorry, what alternate universe do you come from where the scouring of the shire "works so well in the book"? It's pointless then too. I also disagree with you on #2, because in the book Faramir is the good brother and resists the ring, and this contrasts ever so nicely with Boromir. Which the film just abandoned.
Oh come on, while I'm not buying any of the extended stuff the sequels written by the author himself, without trying to get rid of the originals, should count as valid.
Sorry, scouring of the shire is one place where PJ got it right and JRRT got it wrong. It was always unnecessary, and well done to Jackson for removing it.
It's possible to be 100%. Qmail has had a bounty on any security hole for iirc 3 years which has not been claimed, meaning it looks to me like it's 100% secure - you assume that there are 5 times as many bugs as you find on any given bug hunt, but 5 times 0 is still 0. OpenBSD may be the same. It's possible to provide services to the Internet and be 100% secure.
Three security issues in a short space of time is quite worrying. Compare it to OpenBSD. I would say it's news if something which happens to every os occasionally happens 3 times in quick succession to a particular one, just like it's news if someone has three car crashes in one week.
A help file should be "safe". Like a text file. Like a html file. People should not *run programs* from strange people over the internet, and I blame no one but the users for all the "run this security patch" type viruses, but people should be able to *view documents* from strange people over the internet. After all, that's the main idea behind the web.
hlp files (or rather the engine which handles them) are part of windows. Microsoft has said as much in statements in court under oath. Subversion has never been installed on my (linux) computer, so you can't count it as part of linux. If a program is installed by default on most of the "big seven" distros, or just the majority of linux installs (but how would you ever check?) I suppose you could count it as part of linux, but that's probably rather unfair since those distros are far more functional by default than windows is. Finally, slashdot does tend to post flaws in major OSS. Whenever I've had to do a security upgrade, I've always found the story on/..
If I was in charge of releasing, it would still be 2.5. I think it's 2.6 because it's sort of beta rather than alpha, many drivers are unstable but they're not going to get rid of IDE support halfway through the tree.
But religion is more effective than most at persuading other people to kill for you. One nasty guy who wants to grab land is not too much trouble. One nasty religious leader who wants to grab land is much more of a problem.
It's not being released as often as it used to. Also, the kernel itself is getting bigger - the number of changes per megabyte of kernel source per release may well be staying the same.
I'll normally produce a kernel which is at least working, although sometimes I'll get the bright idea to compile in EVERYTHING, or compile in nothing but what's needed to boot. I've never menuconfigged badly enough to give me an unuseable kernel though.
Slashdot Mirror
The real definition is prepubescent. Ages are just there to make it easier to prosecute. And I do argue for a reduction in ages of consent to something more realistic, although not publicly as I'm scared of others' opinions. But there are plenty of people who argue in favour of homosexuality on the internet but are afraid to do so in real life.
(no karma bonus since this is going to hell, but not a/c because I have no problem saying my sincere beliefs even if they offend people)
We will outgrow them though. What happens when we move beyond the earth? Or when someone invents devices that need lots and lots of addresses (they will happen if the addresses are available). Suggesting a finite number, any finite number, of addresses will be sufficient is silly.
OK, you could complain about that. But Qt is just as free as (for example) readline, to claim it is non-free is simply untrue.
Well, wtf is the program doing processing a document then? Text should be safe, as there is no need for a text document to do things like deleting hard drives or emailing itself to people. Executables and scripts are inherently unsafe, and someone "processing" a script or executable from the internet deserves all they get. But you should be able to "process" a text file without any risk to your computer.
It will depend on your TV. Modern TVs can certainly go about 10Hz faster than they should, you may have to overclock your TV too.
I think that's only the case on early consoles - it's a big issue on the Atari 2600 where you have only 4 ops per pixel, but I didn't think it affected the NES.
I don't really care about the "purpose", I just know what I thought of the scouring of the shire when I read it. I've read all the books at least five times, and each time I thought "can't he just let it end". And other people I've discussed the books with have said the same thing.
It is a very important chapter that proves the maturity of the hobbits and closes the storyline of Saruman.
Their maturity was already proven with Merry and Pippin going to attack Mordor. They went knowing it was almost certain death, to give Frodo a chance to save the world. What more do you want? As for Saruman, if he really needs to die you could have him killed by wormtounge or one of his orc captains around Isenguard. I don't think he treated any of his subordinates particularly well. And I prefer to have a few loose ends.
BTW. Do you really question the purpose of Tolkien in placing that segment HIS book (I wouldn't consider Tolkien an idiot, and that is what you are calling him)?
I'm not saying he's an idiot, I'm saying he made a mistake with this section. Everyone does. Just because he wrote the book himself and it's very good doesn't mean he can't have done anything wrong. I have no trouble questioning chapters from my favourite authors without considering them idiots. Are you saying good writers are always perfect?
He had a reason whether you see it or not. Any person who creates a language and an entire world is not going to waste his time writing a pointless, unnecessary segement.
Like I said, everyone makes mistakes. He may have had a reason, but regardless of that, the section does not improve the book, if anything it diminishes it. That's my opinion, and it's been the opinion of the two people I've discussed the book in detail with IRL as well. It doesn't make Tolkien an idiot.
I'm not sure when it comes to qmail, but the fact that so many audits have been done and none has found any vulnerabilities suggests strongly that there are no vulnerabilities. Anyway, there is a way to ensure you are 100% secure - mathematical proof. It's a lot of work so it's not done that often, but software just does logic and it's possible to prove that it will only do what it's supposed to do, hence no security holes.
Sorry, what alternate universe do you come from where the scouring of the shire "works so well in the book"? It's pointless then too. I also disagree with you on #2, because in the book Faramir is the good brother and resists the ring, and this contrasts ever so nicely with Boromir. Which the film just abandoned.
Oh come on, while I'm not buying any of the extended stuff the sequels written by the author himself, without trying to get rid of the originals, should count as valid.
Sorry, scouring of the shire is one place where PJ got it right and JRRT got it wrong. It was always unnecessary, and well done to Jackson for removing it.
It's possible to be 100%. Qmail has had a bounty on any security hole for iirc 3 years which has not been claimed, meaning it looks to me like it's 100% secure - you assume that there are 5 times as many bugs as you find on any given bug hunt, but 5 times 0 is still 0. OpenBSD may be the same. It's possible to provide services to the Internet and be 100% secure.
Three security issues in a short space of time is quite worrying. Compare it to OpenBSD. I would say it's news if something which happens to every os occasionally happens 3 times in quick succession to a particular one, just like it's news if someone has three car crashes in one week.
A help file should be "safe". Like a text file. Like a html file. People should not *run programs* from strange people over the internet, and I blame no one but the users for all the "run this security patch" type viruses, but people should be able to *view documents* from strange people over the internet. After all, that's the main idea behind the web.
hlp files (or rather the engine which handles them) are part of windows. Microsoft has said as much in statements in court under oath. Subversion has never been installed on my (linux) computer, so you can't count it as part of linux. If a program is installed by default on most of the "big seven" distros, or just the majority of linux installs (but how would you ever check?) I suppose you could count it as part of linux, but that's probably rather unfair since those distros are far more functional by default than windows is. Finally, slashdot does tend to post flaws in major OSS. Whenever I've had to do a security upgrade, I've always found the story on /..
If I was in charge of releasing, it would still be 2.5. I think it's 2.6 because it's sort of beta rather than alpha, many drivers are unstable but they're not going to get rid of IDE support halfway through the tree.
No, I just don't drink as much as I should
Morphix has had a "gamer" version for some time now. Get it from http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/morphix/Morphix Combined-Gamer-0.4-1.iso?download
It's OK under the "mere aggregation" clause
But religion is more effective than most at persuading other people to kill for you. One nasty guy who wants to grab land is not too much trouble. One nasty religious leader who wants to grab land is much more of a problem.
It's not being released as often as it used to. Also, the kernel itself is getting bigger - the number of changes per megabyte of kernel source per release may well be staying the same.
No, 2.7 hasn't branched off yet. That's why 2.6 is still unstable. I'm sticking with 2.4 until it does.
And finally, never ever send read reciepts.
I'll normally produce a kernel which is at least working, although sometimes I'll get the bright idea to compile in EVERYTHING, or compile in nothing but what's needed to boot. I've never menuconfigged badly enough to give me an unuseable kernel though.