yes, but gimp does not take data from a remote site, mozilla does. therefore, if handing that data to the local machine unchecked results in a crash, mozilla must check it, while gimp should check it.
X crashing because I entered an obvious bogus value in a gimp dialog is one thing. X crashing because I clicked a hyperlink in mozilla is a very different thing.
that doesn't mean the underlying bug in X should not be fixed - it should. however, mozilla should still check stuff before handing it to the local system.
disclaimer: I wrote the bugtraq posting. the above is why I labeled it a DoS in mozilla.
When it comes to mp3 trading, usage of illicit drugs, or discussing Chinese politics, there are three simple options in the hands of the government:
You should also mention that ironically, governments do not differ very much in this, no matter whether they are communist, capitalist, democratic, republic, dictatorship or whatever.
Which is a funny thing since for some of these systems, the choice should be obvious. For example, in a democracy you'd think that if "the people" (who, according to the book, are the rulers) want something done one way, it's done that way.
The german government doesn't buy Linux, and IBM isn't selling Linux. Just in case you've been living in a box for the past 5+ years: IBM has turned into a huge SERVICE company, and that's what they're selling here: The service to make a solid concept, implement it and provide support for a Linux-powered government infrastructure.
If you'd read the article, you would've noticed that they are, in fact, using SuSE's Linux.
IBM is the service company doing all the work, though. I guess the government wanted to go with a big guy (either for support reasons or in order to take the "unreliable partner" argument away from M$).
Of course, you do make backups, right? Well, if you have a backup system worth anything, the backup is done as root, resulting in backup files owned by root. Which reduces your problem to 5 min of restore time.
Prove me wrong and name a country that considers Germany it's enemy en masse.
I've been on all continents except Australia, and I've never met hostility because of my nationality. I'm just guessing here, but it may be because we haven't bombed anyone since WW2.
So you are saying that the protection afforded to your stupid German ass from 10 millions of Russian soldiers just waiting to rape your woman the way they did in 1945,was completely unnecesary ?
Last I checked, the year was 2002, not 1950.
If it weren't for US army you would have been swalowed by the Russian pig 50 years ago.
Possible. However, even though you may not have noticed, the world has changed since then.
Countless people in Russia, Poland not to mention Israel still hate your guts precisely for this "warmongering" you accuse US of.
I was speaking of countries, not individual people. Yes, there are always people who hate you, sometimes quite a lot. But that and a country as a whole pretty much considering you prime evil is still quite a difference.
I just can' believe your capacity to blame a country that stood by you and practically brought you back to life ( Marshall Plan) from the fucking grave you dig yourself into.
Does that mean we are not entitled to any criticism for the rest of eternity?
Keep in mind one pertinent fact about Germany. They can AFFORD to spend money on such things, for one reason, they don't have to defend themselves.
One of the reasons being that contrary to the US we don't go warmongering around the planet, thus we have less enemies. As a matter of fact, I couldn't name a single country as one.
If you want to speak about US protectionism, talk about Japan. Germany was never demilitarized to the extend that Japan was. The Bundeswehr is quite a capable force, it's just verboten to use it as an offensive weapon by our constitution.
Large armies and extensive military budgets are almost never because you need to defend yourself. Check out the history of Switzerland, one of the best-defended countries for most of the past 1500 years. Huge military costs are always the result of a countries wish to play the global power game.
let's see... Ireland, Finland(1), Norway, Switzerland, Luxemburg, Belgium, Poland... if you limit things to, say, the past 250 years the list grows a little.
(1) unless you count Linux.:-)
disclaimer: I'm not a history buff, I may be wrong in one or two of the examples.
Not at all threatening. I work for a german ISP, and I host one of the largest DeCSS sites. I'm not worried at all, and here's why:
a) The argument about precedence is flat. German law is very unlike british and american law and doesn't give prior cases as much importance. In fact, a judge may or may not consider prior cases as guiding him, but they have no legally binding character. There is no such thing as a precedence in the german legal system, not in that sense.
b) As pointed out by others, M$ claimed ownership of the stuff. That's when they made the move away from being "just the ISP". You can't have the cake and eat it, too.
c) While not being as prominent, the german law does guarantee freedom of speech and publication. For all the bruhaha, I'm not sure if the US free speech laws really are that superior - I have been sued for my DeCSS site in California, but so far the only interest among german authorities was that the guy who handed me the documents the California court sent them said something like "this sounds interesting, I've gotta visit your site".
Here is one difference between sperm and eggs and stem cells. The stem cell has a complete human genome, the sperm does not, the egg does not. So it is a very difficult line to draw, where does human life begin. The fact that no one has been able to draw it conclusively is reason enough, in my opinion, to hold off on public policy decisions that rely on this line.
The problem being that we are not very good at dealing with continuums. Most of our society is build on binary decisions, with some finer details for spice. e.g. guilty or not guilty, and maybe some circumstances that affect the sentence. I dare to say there is no line. Since our legal system nevertheless needs one, the real question is where to draw it, and whether or not to admit to ourselves that it is arbitrary.
And so, the true colors come out. Doing any cross burnings tonight, brother?
Just the usual human sacrifice to the dark lords, cross burnings are only on thursdays.
Seriously, calculated loss of human life is a reality. Every airline, every ambulance, every highway patrol knows that as a society, death is a statistical figure. We just don't like to collapse the wave function on any specific individual. Whether or not that's a religious or ethical preference I'll leave up to the people believing in those.
Contrary to popular belief, the main arguement against stem cell research and human cloning is not a religious one but an ethical one. (There is a difference). Once you start creating humans for the sake of bettering other humans, you have made the judgement that certain humans are worth more than others.
So? Pretty much everyone already believes that, most are just too scared to admit it. If you can honestly say you have no prejudices (without lying to yourself), then you're a member of a damn small minority.
It does not matter that you never intend them to develop fully. Stem cells should be treated with the same respect as anything else human, because they could be part of a human.
Easy, but dumb argument. Not every ovum and sperm is a human being, not even a potential one. Neither is every cell and not every multiple-cell organism. If you really believe that, you should stop jerking off, because it kills thousands of human beings. One of the most difficult ethical questions is when a bunch of cells start being a human. That is a difficult question, one that probably doesn't posess a definite answer. Shortcutting it by using a dogmatic approach ("every human cell is a human") is not only stupid, it also makes it even more difficult to find an answer (because it cuts the discussion).
It might be beneficial to the vast majority of society, but for that minority, it is extremely costly.
Not that having a zero life expectancy is especially "un-costly". As to the bum, well that's an ethical argument. Personally, I guess he'd have a much more fulfilling existence as a well-fed and kept-clean spare parts collection.
actually, it didn't, the russians were already steamrolling all over the japanese forces on the mainland and Japan would've been a communist colony long before the US got there.
so, point granted, it wasn't pre-emptive, just downright powermongering evil.
Although it didn't make the news except for a couple smaller newspapers, the first human cloning was conducted in 1995 at the U of Massachusetts by James Robl and Jose Cibelli. This wasn't published until 1998 - the Boston Globe ran a story on Nov. 14. Shortly afterwards, scientists in South Korea announced they'd done similiar experiments (Lee Bo-yon at the Kyunghee University).
All of these clones were - allegedly - destroyed after multiplying into a few dozen cells.
That you don't see it on TV doesn't mean it's not happening, it just means the news people couldn't find a fitting slot inbetween the ads.
1) The US firebombed Tokio in Japan and Dresden in Germany (and a bunch of other cities), knowing fully well that their targets were civilian and that the damage to the war industry was at best negligable. Killing civilians has been part of warfare for a very, very long time.
2) There are quite a few documents about US attrocities during WW2 here in europe. Not every half-american kid born shortly after the war was a love-child. Now as to the scale of such operations - most of them are a product of propaganda. Read up on Yugoslavia. There were quite a few news articles about organized rape, genocide, etc. - it didn't make the news that when UN inspectors arrived, all of the big headlines evaporated.
3) During? How benign. Thousands, and I'm speaking many thousands, of german POWs didn't return from russia. Several thousands died in US prison camps at the rheine. And that was after the war was over.
4) So? Just because you don't like their culture means they are a somewhat inferior type of human beings? I thought that them holding the same views about the koreans should've made your list of "why japs are evil", but seing that you hold similiar views, I'm not surprised.
Finally, why did the US throw the bomb even though effectively wasting a couple cities didn't help and there was no reason to believe razing a few more would make any difference? Here's my guess: a) they wanted to give this cool new toy a test run, and b) they couldn't stand russia getting the credit for ending WW2, and the nukes would be sure to be given ample space in the history books.
Yes, I'm comparing them. Because the comparison is so simple: Killing people isn't the right thing to do. Period.
If you want to feel morally superior to someone else, start by acting differently.
But hey, the last war made a great economic plus for the US (you fought, we europeans paid). Maybe starting a new one is a good way to end the recession.
In case you didn't pay attention to what's NOT written in the history books: The vast majority of wars - and I say that just to avoid having said "all" and someone can point out the single exception - is started more for national/internal than for international/external reasons. That is doubly true for the USofA after WW2.
Slashdot Mirror
you are wrong. I reported this bug to bugzilla on sunday (a few minutes past midnight).
(yes, I am the original author of the bugtraq advisory)
yes, but gimp does not take data from a remote site, mozilla does. therefore, if handing that data to the local machine unchecked results in a crash, mozilla must check it, while gimp should check it.
X crashing because I entered an obvious bogus value in a gimp dialog is one thing. X crashing because I clicked a hyperlink in mozilla is a very different thing.
that doesn't mean the underlying bug in X should not be fixed - it should. however, mozilla should still check stuff before handing it to the local system.
disclaimer: I wrote the bugtraq posting. the above is why I labeled it a DoS in mozilla.
When it comes to mp3 trading, usage of illicit drugs, or discussing Chinese politics, there are three simple options in the hands of the government:
You should also mention that ironically, governments do not differ very much in this, no matter whether they are communist, capitalist, democratic, republic, dictatorship or whatever.
Which is a funny thing since for some of these systems, the choice should be obvious. For example, in a democracy you'd think that if "the people" (who, according to the book, are the rulers) want something done one way, it's done that way.
The german government doesn't buy Linux, and IBM isn't selling Linux. Just in case you've been living in a box for the past 5+ years: IBM has turned into a huge SERVICE company, and that's what they're selling here: The service to make a solid concept, implement it and provide support for a Linux-powered government infrastructure.
If you'd read the article, you would've noticed that they are, in fact, using SuSE's Linux.
IBM is the service company doing all the work, though. I guess the government wanted to go with a big guy (either for support reasons or in order to take the "unreliable partner" argument away from M$).
Of course, you do make backups, right? Well, if you have a backup system worth anything, the backup is done as root, resulting in backup files owned by root.
Which reduces your problem to 5 min of restore time.
You don't get out much ... do you ?
I'm currently planning my 3rd trip abroad this year, why?
I know many , many people who still hate Germany and frankly are afraid of its famous warmongering.
Sure, I don't doubt that. If you had employed your reading skills, you just might have noticed that I was talking about countries, not individuals.
Anyways, this is getting off-topic and I'm tired of talking to ACs. I put my name on my opinion, do likewise if you want a reply.
I can't believe a German just wrote this.
Prove me wrong and name a country that considers Germany it's enemy en masse.
I've been on all continents except Australia, and I've never met hostility because of my nationality. I'm just guessing here, but it may be because we haven't bombed anyone since WW2.
So you are saying that the protection afforded to your stupid German ass from 10 millions of Russian soldiers just waiting to rape your woman the way they did in 1945,was completely unnecesary ?
Last I checked, the year was 2002, not 1950.
If it weren't for US army you would have been swalowed by the Russian pig 50 years ago.
Possible. However, even though you may not have noticed, the world has changed since then.
Countless people in Russia, Poland not to mention Israel still hate your guts precisely for this "warmongering" you accuse US of.
I was speaking of countries, not individual people. Yes, there are always people who hate you, sometimes quite a lot. But that and a country as a whole pretty much considering you prime evil is still quite a difference.
I just can' believe your capacity to blame a country that stood by you and practically brought you back to life ( Marshall Plan) from the fucking grave you dig yourself into.
Does that mean we are not entitled to any criticism for the rest of eternity?
There are ready-to-go packages for Debian, Redhat and Mandrake (as well as for Beos and Windos) on the download page.
Maybe I'm too ignorant of the ignorant, but what exactly is the problem with "(dpkg|rpm) -i vlc*" ?
Keep in mind one pertinent fact about Germany. They can AFFORD to spend money on such things, for one reason, they don't have to defend themselves.
One of the reasons being that contrary to the US we don't go warmongering around the planet, thus we have less enemies. As a matter of fact, I couldn't name a single country as one.
If you want to speak about US protectionism, talk about Japan. Germany was never demilitarized to the extend that Japan was. The Bundeswehr is quite a capable force, it's just verboten to use it as an offensive weapon by our constitution.
Large armies and extensive military budgets are almost never because you need to defend yourself. Check out the history of Switzerland, one of the best-defended countries for most of the past 1500 years.
Huge military costs are always the result of a countries wish to play the global power game.
your lengthy rant can be disproven with one line:
:-)
http://www.videolan.org
doesn't that make you feel a little stupid?
no, you idiot. I'm saying the US was no innocent victim in Pearl Harbour.
let's see... Ireland, Finland(1), Norway, Switzerland, Luxemburg, Belgium, Poland... if you limit things to, say, the past 250 years the list grows a little.
:-)
(1) unless you count Linux.
disclaimer: I'm not a history buff, I may be wrong in one or two of the examples.
Not at all threatening. I work for a german ISP, and I host one of the largest DeCSS sites. I'm not worried at all, and here's why:
a) The argument about precedence is flat. German law is very unlike british and american law and doesn't give prior cases as much importance. In fact, a judge may or may not consider prior cases as guiding him, but they have no legally binding character. There is no such thing as a precedence in the german legal system, not in that sense.
b) As pointed out by others, M$ claimed ownership of the stuff. That's when they made the move away from being "just the ISP". You can't have the cake and eat it, too.
c) While not being as prominent, the german law does guarantee freedom of speech and publication. For all the bruhaha, I'm not sure if the US free speech laws really are that superior - I have been sued for my DeCSS site in California, but so far the only interest among german authorities was that the guy who handed me the documents the California court sent them said something like "this sounds interesting, I've gotta visit your site".
Here is one difference between sperm and eggs and stem cells. The stem cell has a complete human genome, the sperm does not, the egg does not. So it is a very difficult line to draw, where does human life begin. The fact that no one has been able to draw it conclusively is reason enough, in my opinion, to hold off on public policy decisions that rely on this line.
The problem being that we are not very good at dealing with continuums. Most of our society is build on binary decisions, with some finer details for spice. e.g. guilty or not guilty, and maybe some circumstances that affect the sentence.
I dare to say there is no line. Since our legal system nevertheless needs one, the real question is where to draw it, and whether or not to admit to ourselves that it is arbitrary.
And so, the true colors come out. Doing any cross burnings tonight, brother?
Just the usual human sacrifice to the dark lords, cross burnings are only on thursdays.
Seriously, calculated loss of human life is a reality. Every airline, every ambulance, every highway patrol knows that as a society, death is a statistical figure. We just don't like to collapse the wave function on any specific individual. Whether or not that's a religious or ethical preference I'll leave up to the people believing in those.
Contrary to popular belief, the main arguement against stem cell research and human cloning is not a religious one but an ethical one. (There is a difference). Once you start creating humans for the sake of bettering other humans, you have made the judgement that certain humans are worth more than others.
So? Pretty much everyone already believes that, most are just too scared to admit it. If you can honestly say you have no prejudices (without lying to yourself), then you're a member of a damn small minority.
It does not matter that you never intend them to develop fully. Stem cells should be treated with the same respect as anything else human, because they could be part of a human.
Easy, but dumb argument. Not every ovum and sperm is a human being, not even a potential one. Neither is every cell and not every multiple-cell organism. If you really believe that, you should stop jerking off, because it kills thousands of human beings.
One of the most difficult ethical questions is when a bunch of cells start being a human. That is a difficult question, one that probably doesn't posess a definite answer. Shortcutting it by using a dogmatic approach ("every human cell is a human") is not only stupid, it also makes it even more difficult to find an answer (because it cuts the discussion).
It might be beneficial to the vast majority of society, but for that minority, it is extremely costly.
Not that having a zero life expectancy is especially "un-costly". As to the bum, well that's an ethical argument. Personally, I guess he'd have a much more fulfilling existence as a well-fed and kept-clean spare parts collection.
it pre-empted an invasion, didn't it?
actually, it didn't, the russians were already steamrolling all over the japanese forces on the mainland and Japan would've been a communist colony long before the US got there.
so, point granted, it wasn't pre-emptive, just downright powermongering evil.
which was a trap laid by FDR, much like the germans started the war by "shooting back".
Although it didn't make the news except for a couple smaller newspapers, the first human cloning was conducted in 1995 at the U of Massachusetts by James Robl and Jose Cibelli.
This wasn't published until 1998 - the Boston Globe ran a story on Nov. 14. Shortly afterwards, scientists in South Korea announced they'd done similiar experiments (Lee Bo-yon at the Kyunghee University).
All of these clones were - allegedly - destroyed after multiplying into a few dozen cells.
That you don't see it on TV doesn't mean it's not happening, it just means the news people couldn't find a fitting slot inbetween the ads.
let's see...
1) The US firebombed Tokio in Japan and Dresden in Germany (and a bunch of other cities), knowing fully well that their targets were civilian and that the damage to the war industry was at best negligable.
Killing civilians has been part of warfare for a very, very long time.
2) There are quite a few documents about US attrocities during WW2 here in europe. Not every half-american kid born shortly after the war was a love-child.
Now as to the scale of such operations - most of them are a product of propaganda. Read up on Yugoslavia. There were quite a few news articles about organized rape, genocide, etc. - it didn't make the news that when UN inspectors arrived, all of the big headlines evaporated.
3) During? How benign. Thousands, and I'm speaking many thousands, of german POWs didn't return from russia. Several thousands died in US prison camps at the rheine. And that was after the war was over.
4) So? Just because you don't like their culture means they are a somewhat inferior type of human beings? I thought that them holding the same views about the koreans should've made your list of "why japs are evil", but seing that you hold similiar views, I'm not surprised.
Finally, why did the US throw the bomb even though effectively wasting a couple cities didn't help and there was no reason to believe razing a few more would make any difference?
Here's my guess: a) they wanted to give this cool new toy a test run, and b) they couldn't stand russia getting the credit for ending WW2, and the nukes would be sure to be given ample space in the history books.
Yes, I'm comparing them. Because the comparison is so simple: Killing people isn't the right thing to do. Period.
If you want to feel morally superior to someone else, start by acting differently.
But hey, the last war made a great economic plus for the US (you fought, we europeans paid). Maybe starting a new one is a good way to end the recession.
In case you didn't pay attention to what's NOT written in the history books: The vast majority of wars - and I say that just to avoid having said "all" and someone can point out the single exception - is started more for national/internal than for international/external reasons. That is doubly true for the USofA after WW2.
> If allowed to develope a nuke, he's likely to
> use it against a civilian target. Possibly in a
> pre-emptive strike.
you mean, just like the USofA did to Hiroshima and Nagasaki? damn, the guy really is evil!
I stand corrected. I don't know about the legal strength of EULAs in Canada, so the point may or may not be true anyway.