I've taught middle school science for seven years now, I'm not surprised in the least by these findings... Students as a whole do not know how to think logically, and schools as a whole aren't doing a good job of teaching them (not that they'd pay attention anyway)...
Are you sure that he *really* criticized the oil companies?
He lamented the fact that no new refineries have been built in the United States since the 1970's, but what he didn't add is that this is hardly the fault of the oil companies (and I'm certain that he's aware of this). Plan on a followup post/announcement detailing the need to curtail the influence of radical environmentalists so that we can build some new refineries.
With that said, it's hard to argue against the need for more refineries - demand for refined petroleum products has far exceeded the supplies of the 1970. As a matter of fact, we managed to do that in the late 70's and early 80's...
RW
I'll look into the alternatives, though it's still sad I won't be able to depend on their stability as I would the base system.
Actually, I would expect the quality to be even better than when gnome was maintained by Pat, as both the gware and frg developers can (and do) spend a lot more time on it than Pat can/did.
In fact, based on what I've seen ##slackware (freenode), that is indeed the case for both of those alternatives. Disclaimer: developers from both the FRG and GWare are regulars on the channel, so maybe I only hear the good stuff!:-)
RW
Regardless of whether you intend to actually use OpenBSD, I strongly recommend reading Absolute OpenBSD anyway - it's good reading for administering *any* UNIX-like server.
As the original poster stated, netfilter/iptables isn't the easiest thing to figure out, but it's not so bad once you get there. To help, I recommend reading Robert Zeigler's "Linux Firewalls" (second edition) - you can probably find it on Amazon.com for less than $20 (US).
You have a valid point, but if the boxes/boxen are NOT low-end machines - in other words, if they're computers that I would be okay with having in my house - then I don't really care what distro is on them, as I can install whatever I want -- WITH the assurance that the hardware is compatible.
That's not as important for desktops as it is for laptops, but the point remains the same...
RW
Perhaps if you were aware of the existence of political parties (note plurality) that aren't in power, you would reasonable conclude that I am already a member of one.
While it is certainly possible that my political party would enact "new laws to extend the role of government," and "start spending money like crazy," it's highly unlikely considering the fact that my party is the Libertarian Party.
In essense, you're wrong; however, we wouldn't want to ruin your pleasing visions.
Sure, there's a "free" driver, and a non-free management interface,
so it's only half a driver. Pretending to have a production system
using a raid card that with no supportable management interface so you
have to reboot to fix anything is
like buying birth control pills in
packs of 20. Pretty soon you're going to take a good fucking on a day
you really can't afford it. Period.
First, no, I'm not even close to under 18; if you were half as intelligent as you think you are, then you would have already figured that out...
The problem is this: government should not have any authority to make decisions for anyone unless those decisions infringe upon the rights of another individual. In this particular case, it is (and should be) the parents' responsibility to ensure that said children are not exposed to "harmful" or "indecent" or material.
You contradict yourself... On one hand, you don't want government punishing YOU for someone else's bad decisions, yet you DO want government to punish ME for someone else's bad decisions.
Instead of making sure that all potential crime victims are unarmed and thus unable to resist, perhaps we should punish those who commit ACTUAL crimes (you know, things which violate the rights of another human being).
A law abiding citizen carrying a concealed (or not) firearm violates nobody's rights.
Any time I hear "it's for the children," "the elderly," "less fortunate," "disabled," or some other emotional plea for support of some legislation, I always think:
This legislation must be pretty bad if it can't support itself without blind emotional pleas...
Yeah, it's about time the government figured out that all of us citizens are too ignorant to make our own decisions. We don't know what's best for us, and we certainly don't want any personal accountability involved. It's easier if they make all of the important decisions for us... /sarcasm
I for one am sick and tired of living in a nanny state. Government's only legitimate function is to secure individual rights; unless someone else's rights are being infringed upon, government has no legitimate interest.
This is true; of course, I never stated otherwise. I have as much disdain for the big government conservatives as I do for the liberals - both major parties have been taken over by their extremist wings...
He could even start a private airline company that doesn't require ID
No, he can't - the federal government mandates that all airlines require identification. As I stated in another post, IF the airline were TRULY a private business imposing certain requirements on potential customers, THEN this would be acceptable. As it stands, however, the airline is a de facto corporation of the federal government.
Since you consider yourself a liberal, I'll take this opportunity to say "thank you" - you guys are the ones that have always clamored for more government involvement in everything.
IF the airlines were TRULY private companies, then I would be in full agreement with you - they COULD require whatever they want as a condition of using their privately owned equipment. HOWEVER, airlines are effectively government-run companies due to the extensive regulations imposed upon them. So long as they are being operated by the federal government, they are (or should be) bound to adhere to the Constitutional limitations on that same government.
Of course, IF the government actually operated within its Constitutional limitations, we wouldn't be having this discussion...
RW
Slashdot Mirror
I've taught middle school science for seven years now, I'm not surprised in the least by these findings... Students as a whole do not know how to think logically, and schools as a whole aren't doing a good job of teaching them (not that they'd pay attention anyway)...
RW
Check out MoneyDance - I've used it for over two years now, and it's great...
It's not free, but all software doesn't have to be free...
RW
Are you sure that he *really* criticized the oil companies?
He lamented the fact that no new refineries have been built in the United States since the 1970's, but what he didn't add is that this is hardly the fault of the oil companies (and I'm certain that he's aware of this). Plan on a followup post/announcement detailing the need to curtail the influence of radical environmentalists so that we can build some new refineries.
With that said, it's hard to argue against the need for more refineries - demand for refined petroleum products has far exceeded the supplies of the 1970. As a matter of fact, we managed to do that in the late 70's and early 80's...
RW
Come to #slackman on freenode irc and talk to Sandman1 and/or Straterra - both have done exactly that for ssh.
RW
The fix is broken too...
RW
Until Pat updates -current (and /patches), I made a 1.0.7 pack using his slackbuild script:
r d/
http://rlworkman.net/linux/pkgs/mozilla-thunderbi
RW
Actually, I would expect the quality to be even better than when gnome was maintained by Pat, as both the gware and frg developers can (and do) spend a lot more time on it than Pat can/did.
In fact, based on what I've seen ##slackware (freenode), that is indeed the case for both of those alternatives. Disclaimer: developers from both the FRG and GWare are regulars on the channel, so maybe I only hear the good stuff!
RW
Regardless of whether you intend to actually use OpenBSD, I strongly recommend reading Absolute OpenBSD anyway - it's good reading for administering *any* UNIX-like server.
As the original poster stated, netfilter/iptables isn't the easiest thing to figure out, but it's not so bad once you get there. To help, I recommend reading Robert Zeigler's "Linux Firewalls" (second edition) - you can probably find it on Amazon.com for less than $20 (US).
Regardless of what you decide, good luck!
RW
You should try actually visiting the links in the summary - this one http://www.slackbook.org/ has the following visible without even scrolling:
The Book
* Split HTML
* Single-page HTML
* DocBook Source
* Post script
* PDF
I guess it's a bit much to ask for someone to do a little bit on their own - perhaps that's why Slackware isn't as popular as some other distros...
RW
Not really; so long as you place it behind a stateful firewall and don't route anything else to the machine, it will be fine...
RW
You have a valid point, but if the boxes/boxen are NOT low-end machines - in other words, if they're computers that I would be okay with having in my house - then I don't really care what distro is on them, as I can install whatever I want -- WITH the assurance that the hardware is compatible. That's not as important for desktops as it is for laptops, but the point remains the same... RW
Right... as if anyone running *BSD is going to let you come over and do *anything* to their machine... RW
While it is certainly possible that my political party would enact "new laws to extend the role of government," and "start spending money like crazy," it's highly unlikely considering the fact that my party is the Libertarian Party.
In essense, you're wrong; however, we wouldn't want to ruin your pleasing visions.
Praise be to the state, amen.
RW
Whether you BELIEVE that x event has/will happen(ed) does NOT change whether x event did/will indeed happen(ed).
I'm disappointed in IMax - I've always loved their shows...
RW
Didn't he mean "NO Period?"
RW
The problem is this: government should not have any authority to make decisions for anyone unless those decisions infringe upon the rights of another individual. In this particular case, it is (and should be) the parents' responsibility to ensure that said children are not exposed to "harmful" or "indecent" or material.
RW
Since you can't, then you don't...
RW
Instead of making sure that all potential crime victims are unarmed and thus unable to resist, perhaps we should punish those who commit ACTUAL crimes (you know, things which violate the rights of another human being).
A law abiding citizen carrying a concealed (or not) firearm violates nobody's rights.
RW
Wonderful point there...
Any time I hear "it's for the children," "the elderly," "less fortunate," "disabled," or some other emotional plea for support of some legislation, I always think:
This legislation must be pretty bad if it can't support itself without blind emotional pleas...
RW
Yeah, it's about time the government figured out that all of us citizens are too ignorant to make our own decisions. We don't know what's best for us, and we certainly don't want any personal accountability involved. It's easier if they make all of the important decisions for us...
/sarcasm
I for one am sick and tired of living in a nanny state. Government's only legitimate function is to secure individual rights; unless someone else's rights are being infringed upon, government has no legitimate interest.
RW
Wait, let me guess - they institute the death penalty for suicide??? What a stupid law (as are most)... RW
RW
The Constitution does not authorize federal involvement in aviation; therefore, according to Amendment X, ANY such involvement is unconstitutional.
RW
No, he can't - the federal government mandates that all airlines require identification. As I stated in another post, IF the airline were TRULY a private business imposing certain requirements on potential customers, THEN this would be acceptable. As it stands, however, the airline is a de facto corporation of the federal government.
Since you consider yourself a liberal, I'll take this opportunity to say "thank you" - you guys are the ones that have always clamored for more government involvement in everything.
RW
IF the airlines were TRULY private companies, then I would be in full agreement with you - they COULD require whatever they want as a condition of using their privately owned equipment. HOWEVER, airlines are effectively government-run companies due to the extensive regulations imposed upon them. So long as they are being operated by the federal government, they are (or should be) bound to adhere to the Constitutional limitations on that same government. Of course, IF the government actually operated within its Constitutional limitations, we wouldn't be having this discussion... RW