Not to put to sharp a point on it, but who is anyone that god should talk to them? According to the Christian bible god talked to whores, the sick, the lame, beggars, and even sent his familial representative to be a lowly laborer. Who am I? WTF is wrong with you? Apparently you spent your time sleeping in Bible class. I am not arrogant nor idiotic. I can say some asinine things at times though, as we all can. Trouble is that this wasn't one of them. Muslims, Jews, AND Christians all profess to believe in the god of Abraham, they just can't get along with one another in HOW they believe in that god. That's right, they all believe in the SAME god. It was MEN who chose to decide how best to worship that god, unless your are willing to admit that god himself told them all to believe in him, but do it differently from those other idiots. If you think that only Muslims can be or are violent I would point you to the nearest library so that you may study up on all the violence committed in the name of god on the face of this planet. Even today there is violence being committed in the name of the god of Abraham.
Like I said, you need to go ponder the words of your god/prophet/book and figure out just how poorly you follow the principles of your own beliefs.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and opine that you have no fucking clue what is going on in Israel right now, or how American 'Christians' are supporting it? Google for it, it should be a pretty enlightening Easter day for you.
Someone made a film that consists entirely of Muslims protesting violently to stupid shit all over the planet? I'd say 15-20 minutes of film showing nothing but angry violent Muslims protesting stupid shit should be enough to paint them as stupid, to the point that anytime they protest anything the entirety of the rest of the world would laugh at them.
Seriously, not all Muslims are violent. Not all Muslims protest everyone else that does anything anywhere in the world that does not affect them. This whole 'insult to Islam' business is as out of control as political correctness in the US. We should start hanging signs up everywhere that state "Sharia Law not legal here" ()
The non-Muslim part of the world should be posting that loudly and proudly... to the point that ordinary Muslim peoples are ASHAMED of their violent militant Muslim friends. When other Muslims tell them to STFU and sit down perhaps the rest of us can stop worrying about stepping on the toes of Muhammed, prophet or otherwise.
No, I do not for an instant believe that Christians or Jews are any better. All the BS about Mr Gibson's movie was stupid. The crap about The Davinci Code was idiotic. The bruhaha about 'The last temptation of Christ' was ignorant. All of these religious groups that are claiming sacred right to this and that and feel they are being insulted actually need to adhere to the words in their books. Oh, but that's the problem... they think they are. Well, for all their 'righteousness' the have surely fucked this planet up.
If you feel insulted, take it as a reason to ponder for a few moments how well you live your religious beliefs. If you think I left your religion out SMACK!! You too can go ponder your religious beliefs. If when you are finished you still find that you are right to be intolerant of other people's belief systems I have a friend with a gun store and plenty of single use bullets. Use these to massage your temples and all will begin to get better in the world.
Personally I'd like to see more people making fun of ALL religions. ALL of them. If your god is almighty and doesn't want anyone to make fun of them, or tell jokes about them, or in some way portray them in ways that you don't like... well, then I suggest your god come right on down here to little old Earth and tell me about it in PERSON. I will not accept the likeness of his mother on a piece of burnt toast or a water stained wall as a sign. I will not accept that a human prophet speaks for an ALL POWERFUL god. If your god does not want me to draw cartoons or make films, he can come down and explain it in PERSON.
Perhaps that is the problem? god doesn't come down and explain things in person so when there is a challenge to god's authority religious zealots have to act before someone points out that there god is not much good at protecting his image, never mind the feeble lives of his followers?
If that makes you wonder about god... good. I do not want to believe in anything or entity whose supporters are so violent, militant, dogmatic, ignorant, disrespectful, hateful and... well downright antisocial. As such I have less than zero respect for the god of a group of people that want to kill anyone that disagrees with them.
Yes, I know that only a small group of people hijack religion to server their militant causes. My point is that others of whatever faith should be rising up to stop such people from ruining their otherwise good intentions.
Final point is that when good people let bad people ruin their faith and do nothing to stop it, it denigrates all of them. Where are those Muslims that renounce violence? Where are the Muslims that renounce suicide bombings? Why did the Iranian vigils after 9/11 get no real news airplay?
Thanks to all the high profile religious people in the world, Atheism is the fastest growing set of beliefs in the Western World, if I can say it that way.
You found the problem and didn't even mention it really:
This too was trumpeted as a glorious thing that would change the face of our city Never believe the hype. WiMax has a great deal of potential but it will never eliminate the common cold, nor compete with wired broadband for a mere pittance of what wired infrastructure costs. It does however have a niche market that is quite a bit bigger than what most people think. As point to point relay for a WiFi network it has some really good uses, just as microwave links are used between cellular sites in some areas.
If you use a Honda to haul gravel you too will be disappointed in the performance... perspective is everything and a damned good car analogy will explain anything
I agree with you. They are making their products more valuable to advertisers by targeting better than anyone else, and not in an obtrusive way, but a smart way.
Another thing that I find interesting: if Google is truly a do no evil company, they can use these patents to stop others from using them for bad things. I hope that is the case.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you have no experience with engineering anything? Problem solving starts small. Many major problems are solved with simple solutions, and are built on experience with simple problems. The very fact that you denigrate this demonstrates that your problem solving and engineering skills suck... well, that's my take anyway.
Well, first, it's not doughnuts, it's Octoberfest. Second, I've been around since before windows version 1.0. You can tell me what you think of my attitudes but they are based on the reality of having to deal with Microsoft. I have witnessed all that MS has done to pervert the course of normal business, never mind what they have done to pervert the course of fairness. So easily you spill your insults, so poorly you express yourself. Get a grip, some of us DO know more than you.
No, it's not a little early. When you make an announcement, the lid is open and Pandora's legend is all over your shoes. The announcement did not say Suse is the first to be supported, it simply only listed it as supported. AND when you drink the coolaid, do you ever feel guilty? MS has a reputation that spoils any mis-step that the marketing droids might make. In fact this is so prevalent that not many people actually believe MS unless it is in writing and PJ has signed off on it. No matter how unfair that might be, one only has to look at the circus that OOXML has become to know that MS are not to be trusted... sigh
That was theory, so far this is vapor. I'm still waiting for some face time with products like this.
I sincerely hope that they come up with a couple of really really good high speed data methods for wireless so that in 2012 I'll be able to watch the end of the calendar in HD on my cellular phone... while streaming "2010, the movie to a nearby friend.
I don't know about all that tape... hmmm, I might set it up so that Comcast spies^H^H^H^H^H^H employees can watch hours and hours of JibJab making fun of political figures. I might even play some YouTube videos of Richard Dawkins for them. Even better! I'll pipe al jazera tv to them 24/7. Or maybe just set up a IR light box about 1.5 inches from the lens and let them watch the bright bright IR light. Power it from the box's switched outlet and whenever it is turned on the camera will be washed out with IR.
Perhaps if I repeatedly flash 'kill yourself' or 'kill bush' so it can be seen for a frame every 15 seconds we'll get to use subliminal messaging in reverse?
Well, anyone who has been reading my posts knows that I'm all for it. Knowledge is a very powerful thing. When the voters KNOW what the people they are voting for are really doing and saying after elected, they WILL wield their votes more powerfully. With knowledge, people become rather more opinionated. I'm all for letting the constituents tell their legislators loud and clear how they want them to vote on any given issue, in real time... put more of the of, by, and for the people in it.
Voter outrage is a bit more powerful than you seem to understand. When the politicians can control what news the people hear, they can control how those people vote. That should by now be common knowledge. When the people get to hear the truth, the will make their voting decisions based on it. yes, there will be those that will vote the party ticket always, but that will be a small percentage compared to those that will make informed voting decisions. People want to be informed, information wants to be free. The current system prevents both with regard to political information and voting.
I just want to offer/add a couple of thoughts on what you have said.
I do not believe that curiosity is an issue here. If you're presented with a link that clearly states it's to a illegal video of minors having sex, are you really going to say, "oh, gee, you know -- I've never seen one of those before. Why don't I take a quick peek and have a look?"
If I saw something that "clearly states it's a link to an illegal video of minors having sex" My first thought is of Murphy. If it says that SOMEONE will click it thinking "BS, they really didn't post that... did they? click
Keep away from the stove, it's hot..... back turns.... sizzle... crying and tears everywhere
Even if someone doesn't find the concept in itself disturbing, the fact that they are about to witness something which is causing someone else pain and suffering is surely going to make them pause and think. Not to mention the fact that they'd have to be living under a rock these last few years not to know it was illegal!!
Have you ever thought about why hockey is exciting? fights. WWE? fights. Have you ever been stuck in traffic only to find out that it came to a standstill while people gawk at the carnage of a car wreck on the other side of the road? Curiosity is compelling in humans. Cats apparently get 9 chances while we have to get burned to find out. Look at what you can find on prime-time television in the USA... is child porn really so far away from all that? Humans LOVE to see the pain of others. I have no clue why you said that they wouldn't want to see others harmed. We had blood sports in Roman times ferchrissakes!
We essentially exist at some arbitrary moral level only slightly above child sexual abuse. It is not unnatural for a percentage of the population to be curious or immune to disgust over it. For any given sexual deviation this is true, more or less. The arbitrary line drawn will, by definition, make it so that there are innocents on the wrong side of it. It is NOT a black and white issue and treating it under the law as though it were harms lives.
Ask yourself: would you rather a guilty man be set free or an innocent man put to death? The laws drawn up for some crimes are so overreaching that we hang the innocent in order to ensure we hang the guilty. Hang them all, let god sort them out. I disagree very strongly with such actions.
If you find someone that pays for child pr()n, or is the pornographer... by all means punish them, but don't cast your net so wide that you ensnare innocent people. Thoughts are not crimes.
For further edification: Suicide in the USA used to be a crime, watch what happens to people who are unsuccessful at it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_Act_1961 Many people get depressed and have suicidal thoughts. Should those people be treated as criminals? locked away in white leather suits?
We have prohibition on drugs, are there fewer drugs now in the US? We had prohibition on alcohol, it did not work either. Simply making child pr0n illegal does not stop it. Law enforcement will not cure society of the problem. Penalizing innocents, the curious, and accidental possessors of child pr0n will not make it go away nor make the world more safe for even one child.
By all means, search for and punish those who are actually guilty of something, but make damned sure they are really guilty of something first. With all the arguments of what causes harm to a child remember that more than 95% of all child sexual abuse is perpetrated by someone that the abused child knows personally. That person is not likely to have tons of child pr0n on their computer. Pictures on the Internet do not really constitute actual criminal activity. They are evidence of criminal activity... maybe. It's not a crime everywhere in the world. If you don't want the pictures available, go find who posted them, prosecute that person and see if you can find the original photog
"Say you've lost an e-mail and you want to get it back -- it would be guaranteed," he said. "Let's say you are lost in a town you have never been in before and you have to get to a friend's house and there are no street signs -- the directions will work no matter what." I wonder if this can be retroactively applied to certain email servers in Washington?
You know what, I can agree to a point. I surf porn, who doesn't? right? every so often I'm taken to sites that look like child porn without my consent to do so. The link is misleading. I panic and close the window. I'm not guilty of supporting child pornographers or promoting child sexual abuse. It just happens. The government could well spend their time finding those things and shutting them down rather than abuse ME for clicking on a link that was not advertising correctly.
While your argument for how child porn is supported seems to hold water, I have doubts. Your definition would include those that would draw pictures, never involve a human child, and never assault a child. Your net is too wide. You are too far into thought police territory to be credible. I do understand your concern, and the difficulty in curbing the spread of what you feel is wrong.
I do NOT support child abuse, sexual or otherwise... and likewise, I DO NOT support thought police. To simply look at something out of curiosity is not to be an abuser. Scientists have valid reasons to investigate what is available on the Internet. Those with a curiosity about human sexuality have a valid reason to look or seek information.
Your intent and scope mean to imprison all that might be curious as well as those that are hard core abusers through a simple act of thought or interest. God forbid they make C++ programming illegal, how many would be punished wrongly?
Sure, you say well no one should even be interested in child pornography, right? But I did not click on a link that said "Hey STUPID, this is child pornography that will get you jailed"... it was much more NOT illegal in description. As a casual surfer how the FUCK am I supposed to know the difference between 18 and 16? Even as careful as I am, I still occasionally end up on some site with VERY young looking kids? WTF? That is not what I wanted. That is NOT what I clicked on.
I'm left feeling that I do not know if I should surf the net anymore if they are going to bust into my home and shoot people because I may have clicked on a link that maliciously redirected me to that FBI link?
In fact, I'm thinking we should have anonymous set up thousands of links to those FBI links so that they can't actually prosecute anyone. WTF dude? You assume that everyone that might end up at that link MUST be some pervert. That just so wrong I don't even know how to insult you.
How about we strive for some open and transparent government. No lobbyists money. Open voting that is monitored by Internet live, not just on TV, and not without feedback. How about we allow ALL legislators the chance to read every proposed law, and receive feedback from their constituents before the votes? How about we allow recall votes on every 8th Tuesday via Internet? How about we put the voting power over new legislation in the hands of the people?
Yeah, you'll tell me that groupthink is not working, just look at digg or reddit or slashdot and I'll reply back that the overall opinion from those sites *tends* to reflect the average opinion. Limit that to voter registration number IDs and it works. It gives our legislators an instant idea of how the voters want the vote to go.
Let each legislator call a 48 hour hiatus on any bill movement if there are blips in the Internet voting. Lets set this up and monitor it via the open source methods so that there is always a whistleblower or 5000 to point out flaws. How about we make this the 21st century government of the people, for the people, BY the people?
Yes, there are problems with that, but doing nothing and leaving the status quo only encourages the ravages to justice that we have been witness to. Change now. I don't just mean presidential party change, I mean change for all of it. The system does NOT fairly represent the populace opinion. That is NOT what the founders wanted. The current system was created to attempt to do that with 18th century technology. We have advanced since then. Lets put some advances in the legislative and governing processes.
No, I do not advocate bio-ID or anything like that. It's simple, show your papers, get your number, vote. Yes, F/OSS can come up with a voting systme that works AND is able to be monitored. It's not that hard.
Take the interworkings of government out of the hands of those that would work behind closed doors and ALL will change. Suddenly, you'll have time to put aside the beer to go vote online for a bill that means something to you when it is all transparent and in your face. When it is as easy as logging on at home there will be a LOT of people interested, they will feel empowered. Form letters saying thanks for your input are ridiculously stupid in response to an email... never mind that they are tantamount to being blown off.
I thought you could. Lets all say it together now. This is what the THOUGHT POLICE will do when they are trying to ensnare thought criminals. Make it so even the curious are guilty, no matter the reason for their curiosity. Yes, all those pretty little links on the Intarwebtupbestruck are there for us to click on. I mean SURELY there really isn't someone advertising child porn, it MUST be some kind of joke, right? click... NO CARRIER
Fucking nazi police state bastards. For god sake, protect the children. Lets ignore that little nasty fact that: About 95% of victims know their perpetrators. Source: CCPCA, 1992. http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/stats.htm#Offenders
Yes, pictures may be offensive to many, but they do NOT correlate 100% to abusers.
People who view physically graphic bdsm pictures are not rapists.
Lets get the fact right people. A casual relationship does not correlate to cause without hard scientific fact finding to back the statement up.
This is worse than a cop dressed like a prostitute to persecute victims of that 'crime'.
I'm so sick of the one-size-fits-all use of pop-psychology to enact and enforce draconian laws.
Lets start by banning idiots from Washington DC rather than guns and work our way down from there./personal rant
Why is it that you can so easily and clearly state the GLARING obvious truth of this but smart people and governments don't seem to understand it no matter how many times it is iterated to them. Perhaps instead of banning handguns in Washington DC they should ban idiots. Yes, I realize the strain that would put on voting machines, but damn!
Indeed, that does seem to be the future plan on today's whiteboards. I was thinking more of doing just enough specialized hardware and software dev to jam 4+ systems in one box, while saving on some power and real estate by sharing certain resources. Hell, you could throw a 100Mb hub inside somewhere and just have one external NIC port. The point was to fix what is working today rather than restructure the OS's completely to handle multicore cpus and call that a fix.
Sure, fix the OS to handle multicore, but also have it so we can cluster or slave them in one box. 4U of rack space is a huge amount. If you have the equivelent of 16 CPUs in there... well, no need to do the math on that for you. One pair of redundant power supplies and you're ready to go for a lot of requirements. If each slave has fiber speed access to their partition on the RAID it's going to run like a raped ape and look like a group/cluster of standard systems.
By minimizing on common hardware, and developing the specialized hardware to do so, we already basically have what we need to build mini-uber computers. My thinking is that 4U of rack space is enough to do it. Turn that on it's side and you have a basic fat tower system.
Heat won't increase exponentially, and reduced power supply heat helps. The more efficient they make newer chips, the better things get.
Right now, *MOST* things that we do on home computers would be just fine on a fanless 800MHz cpu if that is the only process that needs to be running. It's the multitasking that causes the need for more speed/heat/power. Multicore cpu's will help solve the problem but the code to support it fully is still on a noisy machine in the corner of the dev lab... so to speak, and it does not fully eliminate the typical bottlenecks that home computing suffers from.
Go a couple of steps further. Today's motherboards are designed to support one cpu system and a compatible OS. Why not design them to support multiple cpu systems. A VME system will allow you to plug in multiple CPU cards and memory cards, map your apps to the right memory space, share memory.
Something similar could be done with one supervisor cpu handling video mapping for multiple slave cpu's as well as managing a RAID-5 or better disk system that is partitioned and mapped to RAM disk mirror/buffers. Most home users are not having threading issues, they see I/O bottlenecks. When your bittorrent client is downloading and buffering a file while you are trying to watch a DVD it's difficult to get a full system clamav scan done in the background. Using multiple systems, this would be possible and easy. The supervisor system could give you Picture in Picture or tiled views of the video displays of all slave systems, so that while watching the DVD, if there is a pop up window from your system scan it shows in the upper corner somewhere.
Sharing hardware among processes works, but if you really want speed, you need each process to have the full attention of the cpu. More RAM and specialized hardware would allow that for multiple processes. Tasks could be shared out by the supervisor to any non-active processors on the system such that by initializing a virus scan via the supervisor, it pushes the process off to the most available slave system cpu.
Well, that is the thought. I'm certain that many will tell me why it won't work. I just think that if you are going to make specialized hardware you should do more than a bit extra RAM. Go full on with mini clusters or supervised slave systems.
I currently sit infront of four screens at work. I'd like them all to be in the same box if possible, thanks. Running VMs might be an idea, but I like how they work separately too much. Yes, I would add one NIC for each slave system also.. they're cheap.
Once you see the size of some mini-atx boards, it's not inconceivable that you could put 5 cpu systems in one tower case and have a 1TB RAID-5 system in there also. You just need a bit of specialized hardware, and some drivers to make it all look/feel real to the slave systems. You could support built-in video and NICs on the cpu system plug-in cards if you wanted. Treat it like a special motherboard with 4+ slots for system-on-module expansion cards. The variants of the PCI standard would make it fairly easy... I think
The analogy is not good. An unlocked car == unlocked door. Unsecured wireless ap != unlocked car. Unsecured wireless AP == car radio turned on, windows down. Your wireless AP is transmitting. If you use the default settings, it may be difficult for many regular windows users to know if they are on YOUR AP or their own. they will quit fiddling with it when they see their browser is working.
Why not listen to a radio that is playing for free. If the guy that owns that car wants to turn it off, I'll go listen somewhere else or get my own radio, but as long as he is playing it for free where I can hear it... well, I don't need my own. I'm only listening to the sound waves that he isn't using, so no harm, no foul.
Now, if you go into someone's AP, change the config, lock them out of it. That would be roughly equivalent to the unlocked car.
Nice thought, but you missed the turn off back in the alphabet somewhere around CIA/FBI. The MaFIAA might have the law on their side as opposed to the real mafia not having the law on their side, but the law (represented here today by the FBI/CIA) are no better than the mafia you describe. Can you say drugs for guns Contra scandal? Can you say hyperlink entrapment http://pedowar.com/view/755#1, swat team arrests for non-violent criminals, tasers, and plenty of other examples of the 'good guys' acting like bad guys 'because they can' and because the MaFIAA need/want them to. Why are federal agents involved in civil lawsuit arrests? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&output=googleabout&btnG=Search+our+site&q=federal%20agents%20RIAA%20arrests There are those here that can say "oh, the **AA are not doing anything illegal" and I will reply back "show me how they are doing anything legal or moral with regard to copyright infringement?"
You make fine distinctions about what is good/right and what is not. Technically, you might be right. Morally, you are wrong. They use non-criminal organizations to do their dirty work and ruin plenty of lives. They use organizations that support and partake in the crimes you condemn. Guilt by association? Yes. Bad laws are worse than no laws, and those that enforce bad laws are worse than those who break them. Long before "We the people" stand up together and say NO more, there will have to be those of us who say it first.
War criminals are told that 'following orders' is not an excuse for doing bad things. The grueling financial and moral beating that defendants are taking from the good guys on behalf of the **AA is immoral. Following orders is not an excuse. The bad guys have always taken advantage of the legal system whenever possible. Someone mentioned the Untouchables earlier. They made their name by nabbing gangsters for things like tax evasion rather than the crimes they were really wanted for. Yes, the bad guys DO abuse the system and use it against good people. It is not ridiculous to think of the **AA's tactics as mafia like or to liken them to the mafia. The mafia does not kill everyone they come in contact with, nor do they sell drugs to everyone that they see. Extortion is one of their businesses, they are famous for it. So it **IS** a fair comparison and your statements otherwise are what distracts from the debate.
You might have a stronger case if the **AA had disbursed some of the money they won through extortion like pre-litigation back to the artists. It's been 6 years plus and not a dime has gone to any artist. Even the artists are shouting they want to sue the **AA. [google it]
There is at this point, not one reason to feel sorry for the **AA or support them. They have already spent all their good will and continue to use mafia like tactics to push the law onto their side so they can oppressively enforce their business model on the population of the world, not just one country. It takes government collusion to force it on such a large part of the world. With the obviousness of that, how you can think of the **AA as anything different from the real mafia is beyond me. Different tactics don't make them better, just slightly different.
Not only that, but will indy artists get any cut of that? or just the **AA guys? Apparently they don't share well with artists. I don't see any of this benefiting the people most proclaimed as suffering from music copyright infringement.... the artists.
Tin foil hat time? Perhaps Comcast needs to be above the law/FCC in this case in order to take the money from the **AA next year when they begin implementing the **AA's recommended network practices for ISPs. If it is against the law, the **AA won't pay them, well at least not honestly.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to put to sharp a point on it, but who is anyone that god should talk to them? According to the Christian bible god talked to whores, the sick, the lame, beggars, and even sent his familial representative to be a lowly laborer. Who am I? WTF is wrong with you? Apparently you spent your time sleeping in Bible class. I am not arrogant nor idiotic. I can say some asinine things at times though, as we all can. Trouble is that this wasn't one of them. Muslims, Jews, AND Christians all profess to believe in the god of Abraham, they just can't get along with one another in HOW they believe in that god. That's right, they all believe in the SAME god. It was MEN who chose to decide how best to worship that god, unless your are willing to admit that god himself told them all to believe in him, but do it differently from those other idiots. If you think that only Muslims can be or are violent I would point you to the nearest library so that you may study up on all the violence committed in the name of god on the face of this planet. Even today there is violence being committed in the name of the god of Abraham.
Like I said, you need to go ponder the words of your god/prophet/book and figure out just how poorly you follow the principles of your own beliefs.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and opine that you have no fucking clue what is going on in Israel right now, or how American 'Christians' are supporting it? Google for it, it should be a pretty enlightening Easter day for you.
Someone made a film that consists entirely of Muslims protesting violently to stupid shit all over the planet? I'd say 15-20 minutes of film showing nothing but angry violent Muslims protesting stupid shit should be enough to paint them as stupid, to the point that anytime they protest anything the entirety of the rest of the world would laugh at them.
... well downright antisocial. As such I have less than zero respect for the god of a group of people that want to kill anyone that disagrees with them.
Seriously, not all Muslims are violent. Not all Muslims protest everyone else that does anything anywhere in the world that does not affect them. This whole 'insult to Islam' business is as out of control as political correctness in the US. We should start hanging signs up everywhere that state "Sharia Law not legal here" ()
The non-Muslim part of the world should be posting that loudly and proudly... to the point that ordinary Muslim peoples are ASHAMED of their violent militant Muslim friends. When other Muslims tell them to STFU and sit down perhaps the rest of us can stop worrying about stepping on the toes of Muhammed, prophet or otherwise.
No, I do not for an instant believe that Christians or Jews are any better. All the BS about Mr Gibson's movie was stupid. The crap about The Davinci Code was idiotic. The bruhaha about 'The last temptation of Christ' was ignorant. All of these religious groups that are claiming sacred right to this and that and feel they are being insulted actually need to adhere to the words in their books. Oh, but that's the problem... they think they are. Well, for all their 'righteousness' the have surely fucked this planet up.
If you feel insulted, take it as a reason to ponder for a few moments how well you live your religious beliefs. If you think I left your religion out SMACK!! You too can go ponder your religious beliefs. If when you are finished you still find that you are right to be intolerant of other people's belief systems I have a friend with a gun store and plenty of single use bullets. Use these to massage your temples and all will begin to get better in the world.
Personally I'd like to see more people making fun of ALL religions. ALL of them. If your god is almighty and doesn't want anyone to make fun of them, or tell jokes about them, or in some way portray them in ways that you don't like... well, then I suggest your god come right on down here to little old Earth and tell me about it in PERSON. I will not accept the likeness of his mother on a piece of burnt toast or a water stained wall as a sign. I will not accept that a human prophet speaks for an ALL POWERFUL god. If your god does not want me to draw cartoons or make films, he can come down and explain it in PERSON.
Perhaps that is the problem? god doesn't come down and explain things in person so when there is a challenge to god's authority religious zealots have to act before someone points out that there god is not much good at protecting his image, never mind the feeble lives of his followers?
If that makes you wonder about god... good. I do not want to believe in anything or entity whose supporters are so violent, militant, dogmatic, ignorant, disrespectful, hateful and
Yes, I know that only a small group of people hijack religion to server their militant causes. My point is that others of whatever faith should be rising up to stop such people from ruining their otherwise good intentions.
Final point is that when good people let bad people ruin their faith and do nothing to stop it, it denigrates all of them. Where are those Muslims that renounce violence? Where are the Muslims that renounce suicide bombings? Why did the Iranian vigils after 9/11 get no real news airplay?
Thanks to all the high profile religious people in the world, Atheism is the fastest growing set of beliefs in the Western World, if I can say it that way.
If you use a Honda to haul gravel you too will be disappointed in the performance... perspective is everything and a damned good car analogy will explain anything
How did you get three steps out of 'pretend to be a tech journalist'? That kind of math won't make sense to anyone, not even a mac fanboi!
I agree with you. They are making their products more valuable to advertisers by targeting better than anyone else, and not in an obtrusive way, but a smart way.
Another thing that I find interesting: if Google is truly a do no evil company, they can use these patents to stop others from using them for bad things. I hope that is the case.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you have no experience with engineering anything? Problem solving starts small. Many major problems are solved with simple solutions, and are built on experience with simple problems. The very fact that you denigrate this demonstrates that your problem solving and engineering skills suck... well, that's my take anyway.
Well, first, it's not doughnuts, it's Octoberfest. Second, I've been around since before windows version 1.0. You can tell me what you think of my attitudes but they are based on the reality of having to deal with Microsoft. I have witnessed all that MS has done to pervert the course of normal business, never mind what they have done to pervert the course of fairness. So easily you spill your insults, so poorly you express yourself. Get a grip, some of us DO know more than you.
No, it's not a little early. When you make an announcement, the lid is open and Pandora's legend is all over your shoes. The announcement did not say Suse is the first to be supported, it simply only listed it as supported. AND when you drink the coolaid, do you ever feel guilty? MS has a reputation that spoils any mis-step that the marketing droids might make. In fact this is so prevalent that not many people actually believe MS unless it is in writing and PJ has signed off on it. No matter how unfair that might be, one only has to look at the circus that OOXML has become to know that MS are not to be trusted... sigh
I'd mod you funny if I could
That was theory, so far this is vapor. I'm still waiting for some face time with products like this.
I sincerely hope that they come up with a couple of really really good high speed data methods for wireless so that in 2012 I'll be able to watch the end of the calendar in HD on my cellular phone... while streaming "2010, the movie to a nearby friend.
I don't know about all that tape... hmmm, I might set it up so that Comcast spies^H^H^H^H^H^H employees can watch hours and hours of JibJab making fun of political figures. I might even play some YouTube videos of Richard Dawkins for them. Even better! I'll pipe al jazera tv to them 24/7.
Or maybe just set up a IR light box about 1.5 inches from the lens and let them watch the bright bright IR light. Power it from the box's switched outlet and whenever it is turned on the camera will be washed out with IR.
Perhaps if I repeatedly flash 'kill yourself' or 'kill bush' so it can be seen for a frame every 15 seconds we'll get to use subliminal messaging in reverse?
Noooooo, rick astely video 24/7 !!!!!
Well, anyone who has been reading my posts knows that I'm all for it. Knowledge is a very powerful thing. When the voters KNOW what the people they are voting for are really doing and saying after elected, they WILL wield their votes more powerfully. With knowledge, people become rather more opinionated. I'm all for letting the constituents tell their legislators loud and clear how they want them to vote on any given issue, in real time... put more of the of, by, and for the people in it.
Voter outrage is a bit more powerful than you seem to understand. When the politicians can control what news the people hear, they can control how those people vote. That should by now be common knowledge. When the people get to hear the truth, the will make their voting decisions based on it. yes, there will be those that will vote the party ticket always, but that will be a small percentage compared to those that will make informed voting decisions. People want to be informed, information wants to be free. The current system prevents both with regard to political information and voting.
I do not believe that curiosity is an issue here. If you're presented with a link that clearly states it's to a illegal video of minors having sex, are you really going to say, "oh, gee, you know -- I've never seen one of those before. Why don't I take a quick peek and have a look?"
If I saw something that "clearly states it's a link to an illegal video of minors having sex" My first thought is of Murphy. If it says that SOMEONE will click it thinking "BS, they really didn't post that ... did they? click
Keep away from the stove, it's hot..... back turns.... sizzle... crying and tears everywhere
Even if someone doesn't find the concept in itself disturbing, the fact that they are about to witness something which is causing someone else pain and suffering is surely going to make them pause and think. Not to mention the fact that they'd have to be living under a rock these last few years not to know it was illegal!!
Have you ever thought about why hockey is exciting? fights. WWE? fights. Have you ever been stuck in traffic only to find out that it came to a standstill while people gawk at the carnage of a car wreck on the other side of the road? Curiosity is compelling in humans. Cats apparently get 9 chances while we have to get burned to find out. Look at what you can find on prime-time television in the USA... is child porn really so far away from all that? Humans LOVE to see the pain of others. I have no clue why you said that they wouldn't want to see others harmed. We had blood sports in Roman times ferchrissakes!
We essentially exist at some arbitrary moral level only slightly above child sexual abuse. It is not unnatural for a percentage of the population to be curious or immune to disgust over it. For any given sexual deviation this is true, more or less. The arbitrary line drawn will, by definition, make it so that there are innocents on the wrong side of it. It is NOT a black and white issue and treating it under the law as though it were harms lives.
Ask yourself: would you rather a guilty man be set free or an innocent man put to death? The laws drawn up for some crimes are so overreaching that we hang the innocent in order to ensure we hang the guilty. Hang them all, let god sort them out. I disagree very strongly with such actions.
If you find someone that pays for child pr()n, or is the pornographer... by all means punish them, but don't cast your net so wide that you ensnare innocent people. Thoughts are not crimes.
For further edification: Suicide in the USA used to be a crime, watch what happens to people who are unsuccessful at it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_Act_1961
Many people get depressed and have suicidal thoughts. Should those people be treated as criminals? locked away in white leather suits?
We have prohibition on drugs, are there fewer drugs now in the US? We had prohibition on alcohol, it did not work either. Simply making child pr0n illegal does not stop it. Law enforcement will not cure society of the problem. Penalizing innocents, the curious, and accidental possessors of child pr0n will not make it go away nor make the world more safe for even one child.
By all means, search for and punish those who are actually guilty of something, but make damned sure they are really guilty of something first. With all the arguments of what causes harm to a child remember that more than 95% of all child sexual abuse is perpetrated by someone that the abused child knows personally. That person is not likely to have tons of child pr0n on their computer. Pictures on the Internet do not really constitute actual criminal activity. They are evidence of criminal activity... maybe. It's not a crime everywhere in the world. If you don't want the pictures available, go find who posted them, prosecute that person and see if you can find the original photog
You know what, I can agree to a point. I surf porn, who doesn't? right? every so often I'm taken to sites that look like child porn without my consent to do so. The link is misleading. I panic and close the window. I'm not guilty of supporting child pornographers or promoting child sexual abuse. It just happens. The government could well spend their time finding those things and shutting them down rather than abuse ME for clicking on a link that was not advertising correctly.
While your argument for how child porn is supported seems to hold water, I have doubts. Your definition would include those that would draw pictures, never involve a human child, and never assault a child. Your net is too wide. You are too far into thought police territory to be credible. I do understand your concern, and the difficulty in curbing the spread of what you feel is wrong.
I do NOT support child abuse, sexual or otherwise... and likewise, I DO NOT support thought police. To simply look at something out of curiosity is not to be an abuser. Scientists have valid reasons to investigate what is available on the Internet. Those with a curiosity about human sexuality have a valid reason to look or seek information.
Your intent and scope mean to imprison all that might be curious as well as those that are hard core abusers through a simple act of thought or interest. God forbid they make C++ programming illegal, how many would be punished wrongly?
Sure, you say well no one should even be interested in child pornography, right? But I did not click on a link that said "Hey STUPID, this is child pornography that will get you jailed"... it was much more NOT illegal in description. As a casual surfer how the FUCK am I supposed to know the difference between 18 and 16? Even as careful as I am, I still occasionally end up on some site with VERY young looking kids? WTF? That is not what I wanted. That is NOT what I clicked on.
I'm left feeling that I do not know if I should surf the net anymore if they are going to bust into my home and shoot people because I may have clicked on a link that maliciously redirected me to that FBI link?
In fact, I'm thinking we should have anonymous set up thousands of links to those FBI links so that they can't actually prosecute anyone. WTF dude? You assume that everyone that might end up at that link MUST be some pervert. That just so wrong I don't even know how to insult you.
How about we strive for some open and transparent government. No lobbyists money. Open voting that is monitored by Internet live, not just on TV, and not without feedback. How about we allow ALL legislators the chance to read every proposed law, and receive feedback from their constituents before the votes? How about we allow recall votes on every 8th Tuesday via Internet? How about we put the voting power over new legislation in the hands of the people?
Yeah, you'll tell me that groupthink is not working, just look at digg or reddit or slashdot and I'll reply back that the overall opinion from those sites *tends* to reflect the average opinion. Limit that to voter registration number IDs and it works. It gives our legislators an instant idea of how the voters want the vote to go.
Let each legislator call a 48 hour hiatus on any bill movement if there are blips in the Internet voting. Lets set this up and monitor it via the open source methods so that there is always a whistleblower or 5000 to point out flaws. How about we make this the 21st century government of the people, for the people, BY the people?
Yes, there are problems with that, but doing nothing and leaving the status quo only encourages the ravages to justice that we have been witness to. Change now. I don't just mean presidential party change, I mean change for all of it. The system does NOT fairly represent the populace opinion. That is NOT what the founders wanted. The current system was created to attempt to do that with 18th century technology. We have advanced since then. Lets put some advances in the legislative and governing processes.
No, I do not advocate bio-ID or anything like that. It's simple, show your papers, get your number, vote. Yes, F/OSS can come up with a voting systme that works AND is able to be monitored. It's not that hard.
Take the interworkings of government out of the hands of those that would work behind closed doors and ALL will change. Suddenly, you'll have time to put aside the beer to go vote online for a bill that means something to you when it is all transparent and in your face. When it is as easy as logging on at home there will be a LOT of people interested, they will feel empowered. Form letters saying thanks for your input are ridiculously stupid in response to an email... never mind that they are tantamount to being blown off.
I thought you could. Lets all say it together now. This is what the THOUGHT POLICE will do when they are trying to ensnare thought criminals. Make it so even the curious are guilty, no matter the reason for their curiosity. Yes, all those pretty little links on the Intarwebtupbestruck are there for us to click on. I mean SURELY there really isn't someone advertising child porn, it MUST be some kind of joke, right? click ...
/personal rant
NO CARRIER
Fucking nazi police state bastards. For god sake, protect the children. Lets ignore that little nasty fact that: About 95% of victims know their perpetrators. Source: CCPCA, 1992. http://www.prevent-abuse-now.com/stats.htm#Offenders
Yes, pictures may be offensive to many, but they do NOT correlate 100% to abusers.
People who view physically graphic bdsm pictures are not rapists.
Lets get the fact right people. A casual relationship does not correlate to cause without hard scientific fact finding to back the statement up.
This is worse than a cop dressed like a prostitute to persecute victims of that 'crime'.
I'm so sick of the one-size-fits-all use of pop-psychology to enact and enforce draconian laws.
Lets start by banning idiots from Washington DC rather than guns and work our way down from there.
Why is it that you can so easily and clearly state the GLARING obvious truth of this but smart people and governments don't seem to understand it no matter how many times it is iterated to them. Perhaps instead of banning handguns in Washington DC they should ban idiots. Yes, I realize the strain that would put on voting machines, but damn!
Indeed, that does seem to be the future plan on today's whiteboards. I was thinking more of doing just enough specialized hardware and software dev to jam 4+ systems in one box, while saving on some power and real estate by sharing certain resources. Hell, you could throw a 100Mb hub inside somewhere and just have one external NIC port. The point was to fix what is working today rather than restructure the OS's completely to handle multicore cpus and call that a fix.
Sure, fix the OS to handle multicore, but also have it so we can cluster or slave them in one box. 4U of rack space is a huge amount. If you have the equivelent of 16 CPUs in there... well, no need to do the math on that for you. One pair of redundant power supplies and you're ready to go for a lot of requirements. If each slave has fiber speed access to their partition on the RAID it's going to run like a raped ape and look like a group/cluster of standard systems.
By minimizing on common hardware, and developing the specialized hardware to do so, we already basically have what we need to build mini-uber computers. My thinking is that 4U of rack space is enough to do it. Turn that on it's side and you have a basic fat tower system.
Heat won't increase exponentially, and reduced power supply heat helps. The more efficient they make newer chips, the better things get.
Right now, *MOST* things that we do on home computers would be just fine on a fanless 800MHz cpu if that is the only process that needs to be running. It's the multitasking that causes the need for more speed/heat/power. Multicore cpu's will help solve the problem but the code to support it fully is still on a noisy machine in the corner of the dev lab... so to speak, and it does not fully eliminate the typical bottlenecks that home computing suffers from.
Go a couple of steps further. Today's motherboards are designed to support one cpu system and a compatible OS. Why not design them to support multiple cpu systems. A VME system will allow you to plug in multiple CPU cards and memory cards, map your apps to the right memory space, share memory.
Something similar could be done with one supervisor cpu handling video mapping for multiple slave cpu's as well as managing a RAID-5 or better disk system that is partitioned and mapped to RAM disk mirror/buffers. Most home users are not having threading issues, they see I/O bottlenecks. When your bittorrent client is downloading and buffering a file while you are trying to watch a DVD it's difficult to get a full system clamav scan done in the background. Using multiple systems, this would be possible and easy. The supervisor system could give you Picture in Picture or tiled views of the video displays of all slave systems, so that while watching the DVD, if there is a pop up window from your system scan it shows in the upper corner somewhere.
Sharing hardware among processes works, but if you really want speed, you need each process to have the full attention of the cpu. More RAM and specialized hardware would allow that for multiple processes. Tasks could be shared out by the supervisor to any non-active processors on the system such that by initializing a virus scan via the supervisor, it pushes the process off to the most available slave system cpu.
Well, that is the thought. I'm certain that many will tell me why it won't work. I just think that if you are going to make specialized hardware you should do more than a bit extra RAM. Go full on with mini clusters or supervised slave systems.
I currently sit infront of four screens at work. I'd like them all to be in the same box if possible, thanks. Running VMs might be an idea, but I like how they work separately too much. Yes, I would add one NIC for each slave system also.. they're cheap.
Once you see the size of some mini-atx boards, it's not inconceivable that you could put 5 cpu systems in one tower case and have a 1TB RAID-5 system in there also. You just need a bit of specialized hardware, and some drivers to make it all look/feel real to the slave systems. You could support built-in video and NICs on the cpu system plug-in cards if you wanted. Treat it like a special motherboard with 4+ slots for system-on-module expansion cards. The variants of the PCI standard would make it fairly easy... I think
The analogy is not good. An unlocked car == unlocked door. Unsecured wireless ap != unlocked car. Unsecured wireless AP == car radio turned on, windows down. Your wireless AP is transmitting. If you use the default settings, it may be difficult for many regular windows users to know if they are on YOUR AP or their own. they will quit fiddling with it when they see their browser is working.
Why not listen to a radio that is playing for free. If the guy that owns that car wants to turn it off, I'll go listen somewhere else or get my own radio, but as long as he is playing it for free where I can hear it... well, I don't need my own. I'm only listening to the sound waves that he isn't using, so no harm, no foul.
Now, if you go into someone's AP, change the config, lock them out of it. That would be roughly equivalent to the unlocked car.
Nice thought, but you missed the turn off back in the alphabet somewhere around CIA/FBI. The MaFIAA might have the law on their side as opposed to the real mafia not having the law on their side, but the law (represented here today by the FBI/CIA) are no better than the mafia you describe. Can you say drugs for guns Contra scandal? Can you say hyperlink entrapment http://pedowar.com/view/755#1, swat team arrests for non-violent criminals, tasers, and plenty of other examples of the 'good guys' acting like bad guys 'because they can' and because the MaFIAA need/want them to. Why are federal agents involved in civil lawsuit arrests? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&output=googleabout&btnG=Search+our+site&q=federal%20agents%20RIAA%20arrests There are those here that can say "oh, the **AA are not doing anything illegal" and I will reply back "show me how they are doing anything legal or moral with regard to copyright infringement?"
You make fine distinctions about what is good/right and what is not. Technically, you might be right. Morally, you are wrong. They use non-criminal organizations to do their dirty work and ruin plenty of lives. They use organizations that support and partake in the crimes you condemn. Guilt by association? Yes. Bad laws are worse than no laws, and those that enforce bad laws are worse than those who break them. Long before "We the people" stand up together and say NO more, there will have to be those of us who say it first.
War criminals are told that 'following orders' is not an excuse for doing bad things. The grueling financial and moral beating that defendants are taking from the good guys on behalf of the **AA is immoral. Following orders is not an excuse. The bad guys have always taken advantage of the legal system whenever possible. Someone mentioned the Untouchables earlier. They made their name by nabbing gangsters for things like tax evasion rather than the crimes they were really wanted for. Yes, the bad guys DO abuse the system and use it against good people. It is not ridiculous to think of the **AA's tactics as mafia like or to liken them to the mafia. The mafia does not kill everyone they come in contact with, nor do they sell drugs to everyone that they see. Extortion is one of their businesses, they are famous for it. So it **IS** a fair comparison and your statements otherwise are what distracts from the debate.
You might have a stronger case if the **AA had disbursed some of the money they won through extortion like pre-litigation back to the artists. It's been 6 years plus and not a dime has gone to any artist. Even the artists are shouting they want to sue the **AA. [google it]
There is at this point, not one reason to feel sorry for the **AA or support them. They have already spent all their good will and continue to use mafia like tactics to push the law onto their side so they can oppressively enforce their business model on the population of the world, not just one country. It takes government collusion to force it on such a large part of the world. With the obviousness of that, how you can think of the **AA as anything different from the real mafia is beyond me. Different tactics don't make them better, just slightly different.
Not only that, but will indy artists get any cut of that? or just the **AA guys? Apparently they don't share well with artists. I don't see any of this benefiting the people most proclaimed as suffering from music copyright infringement.... the artists.
Tin foil hat time? Perhaps Comcast needs to be above the law/FCC in this case in order to take the money from the **AA next year when they begin implementing the **AA's recommended network practices for ISPs. If it is against the law, the **AA won't pay them, well at least not honestly.