This doesn't address the root of the problem (losing rights), but if travelling abroad with personal info I didn't want my data exposed or scrutinized (say, my pedestrian collection of VW & Volvo pr0n), I'd back it all up to HD & put someplace safe, then tarball what I wanted with me, split it up into 10mb files with par2s, email each file section to new gmail accounts, wipe the HD (secure multiple passes), and bring along a factory sealed brand new edition of my OS, THEN go through the border... (search all you want... it don't boot), or better, not even bring it but plan to buy new 'throwaway' machine abroad, once at my destination, pull down the data, concat & restore. Then reverse this process for the return trip.
Your knowledge is impressive, but St. Augustine was not Black, not in the sense that usually means today, of African descent. Augustine was a Roman... most likely making him Italian. Perhaps you were thinking of St. Francis?
Without probable cause, searches are illegal. Understandably, looking at a license plate could never be considered a search... but I think its somewhere between a search and an interogation. Basically, this system investigates every owner of every car license plate it sees. That's where its wrong... in that as citizens we have the Constitutional right to be secure in our lives without the tyranny of the state scrutizing the innocent, even if we are unaware of it. IANAL, but IMHO this system violates the spirit of the 4th Amendment, or at the very least makes it really easy to do so.
First of all... the iPhone IS special. What it is doing in this app and in the link I'll provide below for jailbroken phones is not something lots of phones can do, if any others.
Second of all, this app was NOT a tethering app. AS you say, tethering is done by either BlueTooth or USB cable. What this app did is create an access point by sharing the cellular network over wifi. You don't "tether" your laptop to a wireless router, do you? Now that we're clear on that, I guess we have to live with everyone calling it tethering.
You're just wrong. Threats are not speech. Yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theater is not protected either, and punishable as well. Not everything that can be said is protected by the 1st Amendment, nor should everything be. If I put your full name, phone number, address, employer, etc., in this post, that also would not be protected. Neither would falsely accusing you of pediphelia.
My statement was in the context of the DOS-based Windows line through ME. NT is a kernel. Moving the consumer line from DOS to the much saner NT kernel was a good move for Microsoft.
Again, this seems mixed up... and I apologize if this sounds nitpicky... but wouldn't it make more sense to say they simply abandoned DOS-based systems,, and moved NT to the consumer line, rather than vise versa? I just think your statement makes their work sound more impressive than it was, like marketing-speak.
No, going NT-based with XP was a good move on Microsoft's part.
I don't mean to troll, (though evil moderators are stalking my comments, so I am prepared for the -1)but this statement seems bizarre and mixed up to me. As far as I can tell, all there is there is NT, not some innovative ground-up OS based on NT... it IS NT. I don't think any consideration was made one way or the other. Its just like saying: "No, going Cheetah-based with Tiger was a good move on Apple's part" or "No, going RHEL5-based with Fedora8 was a good move on Fedora's part."
>"The alternatives to nuclear energy are superior because they are clean and renewable and there are several different truly viable choices."
Pipe dream != viable choice.
reality != pipe dream
>"many perfectly valid, non-panicky, non-paranoid reasons against its use"
Really? You only listed one reason, and that is danger from waste. But that danger is very much manageable, and thus your alarmism is very much panicky and paranoid.
No, I listed 9, and you responded to none of them, brushing them off... whoa... my trolldar must be out of whack here
>"Nuclear power is not safe."
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that, or even if you make it bold or apply other fancy typeface enhancements. It won't make it any less false.
Nuclear power is about as safe as space travel, which is to say, not very. Its insanely complex, thousands of points of failure. It doesn't matter what I say or what you say, whistle blowers are constantly reporting nuclear infractions to the point where the media no longer reports them. If you were correct, this list would not exist. But you are simply wrong, merely parroting nuclear propaganda. Try looking at the reality of it, then deciding for yourself, instead of merely gainsaying every argument.
Dude, how old are you? Why're you repeating old FUD and propaganda that's been discredited over and over by sensible people? Since you sound like a teenage hotshot and I'm guessing you're at most in undergraduate university, I recommend you take an elective in critical thinking, conveniently offered in the philosophy department.
aha... personal attacks, the last hope of the troll.
The alternatives to nuclear energy are superior because they are clean and renewable and there are several different truly viable choices. There is no very GOOD reason to bother with nuclear anymore, and many perfectly valid, non-panicky, non-paranoid reasons against its use. It has served its purpose, and now it is time to leave it behind.
Nuclear power has serious issues that pro-nuke advocates just brush away with ignorance (e.g. nearly every response to my posts), but for nukes to be viable, these issues all need to be addressed in earnest.
Nuclear power is not safe. Period. Making it safe, if even possible, is prohibitively expensive. If only you were aware of the facts and were capable of thinking clearly...
its no exaggeration... That waste is deadly and stays that way for longer than civiliation has existed, much longer. And there have been more than the token 2 disasters (three mile island, Chernobyl)... Can't recall the name, but the experimental reactor in CA that melted down and released toxic nuclear cloud into the atmosphere didn't get much press, but was the reason why work on all new reactors were stopped.
Nuclear energy is crazy dangerous coming and going. But what makes it anathema is that there are easier, safer alternatives everywhere... geothermal, solar thermal, solar wind, solar PV, hydro... I can't believe nuclear is still even discussed!!
ok, well, those problems have been addressed in the new one (pretty sure it now has redundant power supplies and lights out management, as well as up to 32gb ram and other new things), and it still looks pretty.
And if that is still hated, I have an ANS with redundant power supplies for sale (runs AIX... or NetBSD or yellow dog), raid card, extra drawers... parity memory... she's a beast
Volcano technology is too expensive and will take too long to implement, so we shouldn't bother with it. France has proved that nuclear technology is the only quick way to get cheap power right now, and no one really gives a crap about what might happen 500-30000 years from now. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl really weren't that bad, and maybe pretty good. We should use the volcanos to dump nuclear waste, but that's it. Alaska needs 5-10 breeder reactors and the energy problems there are solved. If we could just put a little effort into nuclear tech instead of wasting time with bullshit faggy environmentally clean energy, maybe we could all have little breeder reactors in our homes.
off topic... But... If Verizon and other ISPs are blocking the alt. usenet groups... Why don't users just move to another sub group that isn't blocked... say, superalt. ? Or simply reverse all the group names, so alt.binaries.dvd becomes dvd.binaries.alt (hopefully making it more difficult to block an entire community because none of the binary groups would be in the same subgroup)? Can't binaries be posted on any group? Even groups that just appeared 5 minutes ago?
Why're you so paranoid about even properly managed, limited quantity waste? The marginal increase in background radiation compared to what's already there is inconsequential.
Well... the obvious reasons. 1) the waste is deadly 2) the waste is deadly for 30,000+ years 3) the waste is deadly for 30,000+ years and anytime during that 30,000+ years is going to be desired by whatever flav-of-the-millennium terrorists happen to be around 4) transportation of deadly waste is extremely problematic 5) no one has any idea what will happen in 20 years, much less 20,000 years. 7) any nuclear reactor anywhere is about 20 human mistakes away from possibly global disaster (not as unlikely as you think) 8) any nuclear reactor takes teams of expert, highly educated, highly devoted people to keep it running, while only the development of solar technologies requires the egg heads... the deployment will not... much much simpler... an 8 year old could run a solar energy plant (well... I exaggerate, but its not far from the truth). 9) much much safer, much much cleaner, (but yeah, initially more expensive) options are available
Why are you paranoid about spending money to get to clean energy? What's wrong with a little hard work?
> "breeder reactors are not a magic pill"
There's no magic pill, but this is the only practical solution.
I disagree. For the reasons listed above, its not truly practical, and arguably, solar/wind/geothermal and even hamster-wheel generated energy is more practical.
> "500 years from now"
By then we'd have switched to fusion and mining the moon for tritium, and perhaps space-based solar. In the unlikely case we're still relying on fission, by then it will be practical to simply send off waste into space. These are rather trivial things to accomplish over a span of a few centuries.
This last part is a poor argument. We cannot rely on the unknown future developing technology to rid us of the problems we create for ourselves today. Also, while I too thought "why don't we just send the waste into the Sun," it becomes silly when you realize just how dangerous it is to send nuclear waste off the planet, not to mention insanely expensive.
My prediction: if we don't turn to nuclear now, peak oil is going to destroy civilization. Of course, that would be quite to the taste of many environmentalists.
My prediction... that crazy TX oilman is going to make a fortune in clean solar wind energy. Other investors will see how easy it is to take existing tech and create clean energy with decent returns, and more wind and PV farms will appear. Eventually, hopefully, the momentum of this movement will push technology for better and better returns. 15 years from now, electricity begins to get really cheap. The last remaining coal and nuclear plants are shut down and dismantled. We all live happily ever after.
Well, gotta admit the XServe hardware is pretty slick, at least. But style doesn't really count for much when the hardware is hidden in some cage somewhere. But it surely runs FreeBSD just fine. Also, if you like vmware and virtual servers, check out the free ESX (in another/. summary). Maybe your boss won't notice the difference... ESX sounds a lot like OS X (when pronounced wrong... which is usually).
Its really not all that hard to understand what their Server market is... "Servers for the rest of us." OS X Server is to the server market what their desktop is to the desktop market: a kinder, gentler server for those that don't really know everything they're doing. Someone who does know, perhaps like yourself, that is happy without a pretty GUI and easy to use tools shouldn't bother. Stick with CLI and FreeBSD or Linux or AIX or Solaris. Apple is targeting someone else and apparently you are just collateral damage.
I had trouble with the Leopard X server, but being that the OS was new (10.5.2 at the time) I went around IRC asking and found that others were downgrading their x servers to a more stable previous version (of xquartz & X11). So that's what I did. Still buggy, but crashes occur far less often.
FYI When stability is critical with Mac OS, gotta stay with the 10.x.9,10,11 and wait for the 10.x.3 to grow up to those numbers before upgrading. If machines came preinstalled, gotta bite the bullet and go back and install what's stable.
Slashdot Mirror
This doesn't address the root of the problem (losing rights), but if travelling abroad with personal info I didn't want my data exposed or scrutinized (say, my pedestrian collection of VW & Volvo pr0n), I'd back it all up to HD & put someplace safe, then tarball what I wanted with me, split it up into 10mb files with par2s, email each file section to new gmail accounts, wipe the HD (secure multiple passes), and bring along a factory sealed brand new edition of my OS, THEN go through the border... (search all you want... it don't boot), or better, not even bring it but plan to buy new 'throwaway' machine abroad, once at my destination, pull down the data, concat & restore. Then reverse this process for the return trip.
Your knowledge is impressive, but St. Augustine was not Black, not in the sense that usually means today, of African descent. Augustine was a Roman... most likely making him Italian. Perhaps you were thinking of St. Francis?
fixed
Oh, the irony.
I've been blocking Yahoo for some time.
Pepsi's "Choice of a New Generation" translated into "Pepsi Brings Your Ancestors Back to Life" in German.
Fixed that for you.
well, not that I'm in love with it, but maybe its "we'll cross that bridge when we come to it."
Homer: "Rock stars- is there anything they can't do?
Fixed that for you.
Without probable cause, searches are illegal. Understandably, looking at a license plate could never be considered a search... but I think its somewhere between a search and an interogation. Basically, this system investigates every owner of every car license plate it sees. That's where its wrong... in that as citizens we have the Constitutional right to be secure in our lives without the tyranny of the state scrutizing the innocent, even if we are unaware of it. IANAL, but IMHO this system violates the spirit of the 4th Amendment, or at the very least makes it really easy to do so.
First of all... the iPhone IS special. What it is doing in this app and in the link I'll provide below for jailbroken phones is not something lots of phones can do, if any others.
Second of all, this app was NOT a tethering app. AS you say, tethering is done by either BlueTooth or USB cable. What this app did is create an access point by sharing the cellular network over wifi. You don't "tether" your laptop to a wireless router, do you? Now that we're clear on that, I guess we have to live with everyone calling it tethering.
iPhone 3G as a wifi access point
Can you believe it? Its still the best fishwrap in the world.
I obviosly replied to the wrong post... I just love the new commenting system!
You're just wrong. Threats are not speech. Yelling 'FIRE' in a crowded theater is not protected either, and punishable as well. Not everything that can be said is protected by the 1st Amendment, nor should everything be. If I put your full name, phone number, address, employer, etc., in this post, that also would not be protected. Neither would falsely accusing you of pediphelia.
My statement was in the context of the DOS-based Windows line through ME. NT is a kernel. Moving the consumer line from DOS to the much saner NT kernel was a good move for Microsoft.
Again, this seems mixed up... and I apologize if this sounds nitpicky... but wouldn't it make more sense to say they simply abandoned DOS-based systems,, and moved NT to the consumer line, rather than vise versa?
I just think your statement makes their work sound more impressive than it was, like marketing-speak.
No, going NT-based with XP was a good move on Microsoft's part.
I don't mean to troll, (though evil moderators are stalking my comments, so I am prepared for the -1)but this statement seems bizarre and mixed up to me. As far as I can tell, all there is there is NT, not some innovative ground-up OS based on NT... it IS NT. I don't think any consideration was made one way or the other. Its just like saying: "No, going Cheetah-based with Tiger was a good move on Apple's part" or "No, going RHEL5-based with Fedora8 was a good move on Fedora's part."
hahahaha
troll.
Next time you want to argue, maybe you should do a little research instead of just making up stuff.
>"The alternatives to nuclear energy are superior because they are clean and renewable and there are several different truly viable choices."
Pipe dream != viable choice.
reality != pipe dream
>"many perfectly valid, non-panicky, non-paranoid reasons against its use"
Really? You only listed one reason, and that is danger from waste. But that danger is very much manageable, and thus your alarmism is very much panicky and paranoid.
No, I listed 9, and you responded to none of them, brushing them off... whoa... my trolldar must be out of whack here
>"Nuclear power is not safe."
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat that, or even if you make it bold or apply other fancy typeface enhancements. It won't make it any less false.
Nuclear power is about as safe as space travel, which is to say, not very. Its insanely complex, thousands of points of failure. It doesn't matter what I say or what you say, whistle blowers are constantly reporting nuclear infractions to the point where the media no longer reports them. If you were correct, this list would not exist. But you are simply wrong, merely parroting nuclear propaganda. Try looking at the reality of it, then deciding for yourself, instead of merely gainsaying every argument.
Dude, how old are you? Why're you repeating old FUD and propaganda that's been discredited over and over by sensible people? Since you sound like a teenage hotshot and I'm guessing you're at most in undergraduate university, I recommend you take an elective in critical thinking, conveniently offered in the philosophy department.
aha... personal attacks, the last hope of the troll.
The alternatives to nuclear energy are superior because they are clean and renewable and there are several different truly viable choices. There is no very GOOD reason to bother with nuclear anymore, and many perfectly valid, non-panicky, non-paranoid reasons against its use. It has served its purpose, and now it is time to leave it behind.
Nuclear power has serious issues that pro-nuke advocates just brush away with ignorance (e.g. nearly every response to my posts), but for nukes to be viable, these issues all need to be addressed in earnest.
Nuclear power is not safe. Period. Making it safe, if even possible, is prohibitively expensive. If only you were aware of the facts and were capable of thinking clearly...
its no exaggeration... That waste is deadly and stays that way for longer than civiliation has existed, much longer. And there have been more than the token 2 disasters (three mile island, Chernobyl)... Can't recall the name, but the experimental reactor in CA that melted down and released toxic nuclear cloud into the atmosphere didn't get much press, but was the reason why work on all new reactors were stopped.
Nuclear energy is crazy dangerous coming and going. But what makes it anathema is that there are easier, safer alternatives everywhere... geothermal, solar thermal, solar wind, solar PV, hydro... I can't believe nuclear is still even discussed!!
ok, well, those problems have been addressed in the new one (pretty sure it now has redundant power supplies and lights out management, as well as up to 32gb ram and other new things), and it still looks pretty.
And if that is still hated, I have an ANS with redundant power supplies for sale (runs AIX... or NetBSD or yellow dog), raid card, extra drawers... parity memory... she's a beast
Volcano technology is too expensive and will take too long to implement, so we shouldn't bother with it. France has proved that nuclear technology is the only quick way to get cheap power right now, and no one really gives a crap about what might happen 500-30000 years from now. Three Mile Island and Chernobyl really weren't that bad, and maybe pretty good. We should use the volcanos to dump nuclear waste, but that's it. Alaska needs 5-10 breeder reactors and the energy problems there are solved. If we could just put a little effort into nuclear tech instead of wasting time with bullshit faggy environmentally clean energy, maybe we could all have little breeder reactors in our homes.
gotta love sarcasm
off topic... But... If Verizon and other ISPs are blocking the alt. usenet groups... Why don't users just move to another sub group that isn't blocked... say, superalt. ? Or simply reverse all the group names, so alt.binaries.dvd becomes dvd.binaries.alt (hopefully making it more difficult to block an entire community because none of the binary groups would be in the same subgroup)? Can't binaries be posted on any group? Even groups that just appeared 5 minutes ago?
Why're you so paranoid about even properly managed, limited quantity waste? The marginal increase in background radiation compared to what's already there is inconsequential.
Well... the obvious reasons.
1) the waste is deadly
2) the waste is deadly for 30,000+ years
3) the waste is deadly for 30,000+ years and anytime during that 30,000+ years is going to be desired by whatever flav-of-the-millennium terrorists happen to be around
4) transportation of deadly waste is extremely problematic
5) no one has any idea what will happen in 20 years, much less 20,000 years.
7) any nuclear reactor anywhere is about 20 human mistakes away from possibly global disaster (not as unlikely as you think)
8) any nuclear reactor takes teams of expert, highly educated, highly devoted people to keep it running, while only the development of solar technologies requires the egg heads... the deployment will not... much much simpler... an 8 year old could run a solar energy plant (well... I exaggerate, but its not far from the truth).
9) much much safer, much much cleaner, (but yeah, initially more expensive) options are available
Why are you paranoid about spending money to get to clean energy? What's wrong with a little hard work?
> "breeder reactors are not a magic pill"
There's no magic pill, but this is the only practical solution.
I disagree. For the reasons listed above, its not truly practical, and arguably, solar/wind/geothermal and even hamster-wheel generated energy is more practical.
> "500 years from now"
By then we'd have switched to fusion and mining the moon for tritium, and perhaps space-based solar. In the unlikely case we're still relying on fission, by then it will be practical to simply send off waste into space. These are rather trivial things to accomplish over a span of a few centuries.
This last part is a poor argument. We cannot rely on the unknown future developing technology to rid us of the problems we create for ourselves today. Also, while I too thought "why don't we just send the waste into the Sun," it becomes silly when you realize just how dangerous it is to send nuclear waste off the planet, not to mention insanely expensive.
My prediction: if we don't turn to nuclear now, peak oil is going to destroy civilization. Of course, that would be quite to the taste of many environmentalists.
My prediction... that crazy TX oilman is going to make a fortune in clean solar wind energy. Other investors will see how easy it is to take existing tech and create clean energy with decent returns, and more wind and PV farms will appear. Eventually, hopefully, the momentum of this movement will push technology for better and better returns. 15 years from now, electricity begins to get really cheap. The last remaining coal and nuclear plants are shut down and dismantled. We all live happily ever after.
Well, gotta admit the XServe hardware is pretty slick, at least. But style doesn't really count for much when the hardware is hidden in some cage somewhere. But it surely runs FreeBSD just fine. Also, if you like vmware and virtual servers, check out the free ESX (in another /. summary). Maybe your boss won't notice the difference... ESX sounds a lot like OS X (when pronounced wrong... which is usually).
Its really not all that hard to understand what their Server market is... "Servers for the rest of us." OS X Server is to the server market what their desktop is to the desktop market: a kinder, gentler server for those that don't really know everything they're doing. Someone who does know, perhaps like yourself, that is happy without a pretty GUI and easy to use tools shouldn't bother. Stick with CLI and FreeBSD or Linux or AIX or Solaris. Apple is targeting someone else and apparently you are just collateral damage.
I had trouble with the Leopard X server, but being that the OS was new (10.5.2 at the time) I went around IRC asking and found that others were downgrading their x servers to a more stable previous version (of xquartz & X11). So that's what I did. Still buggy, but crashes occur far less often.
FYI When stability is critical with Mac OS, gotta stay with the 10.x.9,10,11 and wait for the 10.x.3 to grow up to those numbers before upgrading. If machines came preinstalled, gotta bite the bullet and go back and install what's stable.