What? The statistics that you gave show that incidence of burglaries is half in the US (guns) than that of UK (no guns). I'm given to understand that most burglars try to strike when no one is home, it won't elimiate *all* burglaries, so it's a bit of a straw man argument anyway. Also, if I take into consideration the costs involved, you're looking at thousands of dollars per window for unbreakable glass, plus steel reinforced door frames, etc., as opposed to a few hundred for a home defense weapon. Lastly, back to my original point, a burglar is likely going to avoid a house in which he thinks there is a home owner ready and willing to defend him or herself.
The US has a higher rate than France, Ireland and Greence. Why don't all those handguns prevent people stealing from houses?
Perhaps because if you're a burglar, and you think there might be a good chance of the home owner also being a gun owner, you might plan your burglary when the home owner isn't there? In the UK, where guns are banned, the burglary rate is very nearly double. It looks to me like "all those handguns" are quite posibly preventing people from stealing from houses.
Where I work, we're deploying http://www.ardence.com/, which essentially does what you want. You create locked-down master images tweaked the way you want them, and the clients essentially use your Ardence server as a hard disk. The difference between this and a solution such as Citrix is that other than disk I/O, the OS uses local hardware instead of server-side computing. It works very well, and each time the machine boots it gets a pristine fresh install of the OS; all changes the user made are discarded. Not only that, but switching desktop OSes is as simple as a reboot. Changing a master image is very easy, too, and you can keep multiple images in case a change you made blows things up. One example they show in their demo is to boot Windows on the worker-bee desktops during business hours; reboot after hours to Linux to participate in a compute grid, then boot back to Windows before the start of the workday. The only caveat is that it requires a reliable network, obviously, but if a connection is lost, the machine stays up until reconnect (as opposed to kernel panic or such.) That, and you have to use roaming profiles or $home to keep personalized settings. It's a very flexible and cool solution you should check out.
Resisting the temptaition to make le French jokes and political fun, I'm not getting why they are getting so excited about this.
I'm currently researching a Blackberry deployment for my organization, and it appears to me that the French have completely overlooked the appropriate solution for Blackberries. It appears that they are using the Blackberry Internet Service, which does, in fact, present significant security risks. But Blackberry also offers the Blackberry Enterprise Server (BES), which resides inside the corporate firewall, that creates an encrypted, end-to-end connection to the Blackberry devices it services. At no time is the private data decrypted anywhere except the BES or the handheld. In addition, the BES administrator can enforce policies that prohibit applications from being run, etc. Sure, there are costs involved, but it seems that crippling the way the French government does business would be more expensive in the long run. Am I missing something?
So, the theory of Evolution as Origin of Species requires genetic mutation and survival of the fittest for one species to evolve into another. If this can't happen during an animal's lifetime, how can genetic mutations be passed to the next generation to make them "more fit"? While in the egg? To me, the only real trait that will help that is a shell that's a bit stronger than the rest but not so strong that the chick can't get out. I'm clearly missing something, and I'm sure one of my fellow Slashdotters will straighten me out.
When I was in school, specifically in physics class, we often worked in groups. I would often help folks much smarter than myself by presenting a new point of view to a problem when I had marginal understadning of the problem itself. I would ask a question that would spark an epiffany, then sit and watch in awe as these people solved the problem very quickly. I think the value of doing this is that the true scientists can take advantage of lesser mortals' ideas for new ways of solving the problems.
I see lots of comments about the poor being most affected. Truth is, every time I can think of that I've been in a poor neighborhood, I see lots of satellite dishes. I'd bet that many more have cable.
I am not poor, yet I don't have cable or satellite. Why? Because I can't stand the thought of paying for what is mostly crap and a nearly complete waste of time. Sure, I would like to have Discovery and a few other channels, but I'm quite happy with PBS and the internet. The stuff I really want, I buy on DVD (if available.)
. . . see a market for truly artistic PC cases? It seems there are very few companies that do this, and it's basically adding some spray paint, christmas lights and plexiglass windows to your generic box.
I know the president has trouble in front of the camera, and I admit can look like an idiot at times (I'm not blind), however, I have a little trouble reconciling that he has an MBA from Harvard. Last I checked, they aren't giving those away, and I haven't seen any real evidence to suggest that they did. It's a bit disturbing that form is more important than substance for you. I can tell where GWB stands on an issue, but can't on the Kerry side of things, except that he goes wherever the wind blows. To me, you can't get where you want to go by focusing on where you are now. The entire Kerry campaign is based on moving away from GWB, not toward anything in particular, except "a stonger America", which really says nothing.
Finally, how do you know that he "didn't give a shit when those babies were being killed"? Have you asked him? You imply that he was doing coke while watching babies killed. That's rediculous. Have you never done any kind of drug? That was right for you but wrong for him? I think illegal drugs are harmful, but I'm at a loss as to what bearing that has on the current political situation. I'm glad that global politics is black and white for you, and that there are no extenuating circumstances wherein loyalties change. Now, understand that I'm not defending what went down, but is there not a possibility that there were extenuating circumstances? You weren't there, so how do you know for sure?
It disturbs me that we have lost all political discussion and now only have hate speech, cussing and yelling. How does that get us anywhere?
You frighten me. Really. You are so filled with hate for a man that you haven't thought about what you wrote. Let's take a look:
My "attitude has started a conventional form of World War III...." So, it was this attitude that caused the first bombing of WTC and the Cole? Which president was that under, I forget. Let's look back a bit at some history. How did Hitler get as far as he did without someone stepping in? It was liberal elitists like yourself who decided it "wasn't their problem" and looked the other way until it was almost too late. It frightens me that you sympathize with terrorists solely becuase you hate Bush: ". ..has granted explicit moral permission to kill Americans. . .."
Let's see, what's next? "... all this could have been averted if your Beloved Leader King George had actually tried to find and prosecute Osama bin Laden . . .." So, we take out bin Ladin, and terrorism evaporates? How naive. Also, you assert that "Iraq had nothing to do with 911." The 9/11 Commission report does not completely rule out that relationship. Check for yourself. But let's assume for a second that's true. So, now, if we take out Al Qaida, terrorism evaporates? Again, how naive. Though they are responsible for 9/11, they are not the only terrorist orgainization out there, and it has been repeatedly demonstrated that Hussein and his regime supported terrorists.
"You aren't fooling anyone except about 75% of Bush voters." Ok, I'm not trying to fool anyone. I look at the facts (do you?) and form opinions, not the other way around. Second, from which orifice did you pull 75%, and what does it mean? Third, in what way has " the world has already judged your asinine Imperial policies"? The nations that were against us invading Iraq are now being shown to have something to hide. Chirac has been found with his hand in the cookie jar along with UN officials skimming the Oil for Food program, then using his influence in the region to keep the other nations out of it. It has also been recently discovered that Russia was supplying them with weapons and explosives, and conducted a covert operation to move those explosives to Syria at the last minute. So now "the world" becomes suspect in its judgement of the US. So, who is guilty of imperial practices?
Yes, it frightens me that you feel that a suitcase nuke in NYC is now justified becuase of your biased view of the world. You say it's "my" policies that create all evil in the world, but I say it's "your" policies that look the other way while it builds.
*sigh*
First, Yeah, I got the reference about the president talking about the wrong Abu. You're very smart to watch TV and having it spoon fed to you. I'm wondering if you caught that yourself or after the media pointed it out. Second, I did "give a shit" about the Iraquis back in the 80s; did you? Do you currently "give a shit" or are you just pissed off that we have a president that "gives a shit?" Where do you get off telling me what I have or have not done over the past 20 years?
Ok, first of all "fucknut" isn't even a word. Second, it's amazing to think that what happens "over there" has no bearing on what happens in your happy place where genocide and atrocities apparently don't intrude. Enjoy that while you can.
I'll bet ol' W knows the difference between 'then' and 'than'.
So what you're saying is the best way to go about it is to go in, kick butt, pull out, and let the dictator stay behind to continue murdering hundreds of thousands of his own people, including women and children (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3738 368.stm).
I know, I know, so long as your job isn't outsourced, you're happy.
Slashdot Mirror
"in which case guns are no use at all"
What? The statistics that you gave show that incidence of burglaries is half in the US (guns) than that of UK (no guns). I'm given to understand that most burglars try to strike when no one is home, it won't elimiate *all* burglaries, so it's a bit of a straw man argument anyway. Also, if I take into consideration the costs involved, you're looking at thousands of dollars per window for unbreakable glass, plus steel reinforced door frames, etc., as opposed to a few hundred for a home defense weapon. Lastly, back to my original point, a burglar is likely going to avoid a house in which he thinks there is a home owner ready and willing to defend him or herself.
burglaries per capita:
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_bur_percap-crime-burglaries-per-capita
The US has a higher rate than France, Ireland and Greence. Why don't all those handguns prevent people stealing from houses?
Perhaps because if you're a burglar, and you think there might be a good chance of the home owner also being a gun owner, you might plan your burglary when the home owner isn't there? In the UK, where guns are banned, the burglary rate is very nearly double. It looks to me like "all those handguns" are quite posibly preventing people from stealing from houses.
Whoa. Tongue twister from hell.
Where I work, we're deploying http://www.ardence.com/, which essentially does what you want. You create locked-down master images tweaked the way you want them, and the clients essentially use your Ardence server as a hard disk. The difference between this and a solution such as Citrix is that other than disk I/O, the OS uses local hardware instead of server-side computing. It works very well, and each time the machine boots it gets a pristine fresh install of the OS; all changes the user made are discarded. Not only that, but switching desktop OSes is as simple as a reboot. Changing a master image is very easy, too, and you can keep multiple images in case a change you made blows things up. One example they show in their demo is to boot Windows on the worker-bee desktops during business hours; reboot after hours to Linux to participate in a compute grid, then boot back to Windows before the start of the workday. The only caveat is that it requires a reliable network, obviously, but if a connection is lost, the machine stays up until reconnect (as opposed to kernel panic or such.) That, and you have to use roaming profiles or $home to keep personalized settings. It's a very flexible and cool solution you should check out.
Resisting the temptaition to make le French jokes and political fun, I'm not getting why they are getting so excited about this.
I'm currently researching a Blackberry deployment for my organization, and it appears to me that the French have completely overlooked the appropriate solution for Blackberries. It appears that they are using the Blackberry Internet Service, which does, in fact, present significant security risks. But Blackberry also offers the Blackberry Enterprise Server (BES), which resides inside the corporate firewall, that creates an encrypted, end-to-end connection to the Blackberry devices it services. At no time is the private data decrypted anywhere except the BES or the handheld. In addition, the BES administrator can enforce policies that prohibit applications from being run, etc. Sure, there are costs involved, but it seems that crippling the way the French government does business would be more expensive in the long run. Am I missing something?
So, the theory of Evolution as Origin of Species requires genetic mutation and survival of the fittest for one species to evolve into another. If this can't happen during an animal's lifetime, how can genetic mutations be passed to the next generation to make them "more fit"? While in the egg? To me, the only real trait that will help that is a shell that's a bit stronger than the rest but not so strong that the chick can't get out. I'm clearly missing something, and I'm sure one of my fellow Slashdotters will straighten me out.
When I was in school, specifically in physics class, we often worked in groups. I would often help folks much smarter than myself by presenting a new point of view to a problem when I had marginal understadning of the problem itself. I would ask a question that would spark an epiffany, then sit and watch in awe as these people solved the problem very quickly. I think the value of doing this is that the true scientists can take advantage of lesser mortals' ideas for new ways of solving the problems.
I see lots of comments about the poor being most affected. Truth is, every time I can think of that I've been in a poor neighborhood, I see lots of satellite dishes. I'd bet that many more have cable.
I am not poor, yet I don't have cable or satellite. Why? Because I can't stand the thought of paying for what is mostly crap and a nearly complete waste of time. Sure, I would like to have Discovery and a few other channels, but I'm quite happy with PBS and the internet. The stuff I really want, I buy on DVD (if available.)
. . . see a market for truly artistic PC cases? It seems there are very few companies that do this, and it's basically adding some spray paint, christmas lights and plexiglass windows to your generic box.
Glad you care. I really am.
I know the president has trouble in front of the camera, and I admit can look like an idiot at times (I'm not blind), however, I have a little trouble reconciling that he has an MBA from Harvard. Last I checked, they aren't giving those away, and I haven't seen any real evidence to suggest that they did. It's a bit disturbing that form is more important than substance for you. I can tell where GWB stands on an issue, but can't on the Kerry side of things, except that he goes wherever the wind blows. To me, you can't get where you want to go by focusing on where you are now. The entire Kerry campaign is based on moving away from GWB, not toward anything in particular, except "a stonger America", which really says nothing.
Finally, how do you know that he "didn't give a shit when those babies were being killed"? Have you asked him? You imply that he was doing coke while watching babies killed. That's rediculous. Have you never done any kind of drug? That was right for you but wrong for him? I think illegal drugs are harmful, but I'm at a loss as to what bearing that has on the current political situation.
I'm glad that global politics is black and white for you, and that there are no extenuating circumstances wherein loyalties change. Now, understand that I'm not defending what went down, but is there not a possibility that there were extenuating circumstances? You weren't there, so how do you know for sure?
It disturbs me that we have lost all political discussion and now only have hate speech, cussing and yelling. How does that get us anywhere?
You frighten me. Really. You are so filled with hate for a man that you haven't thought about what you wrote. Let's take a look:
.has granted explicit moral permission to kill Americans. . . ."
." So, we take out bin Ladin, and terrorism evaporates? How naive. Also, you assert that "Iraq had nothing to do with 911." The 9/11 Commission report does not completely rule out that relationship. Check for yourself. But let's assume for a second that's true. So, now, if we take out Al Qaida, terrorism evaporates? Again, how naive. Though they are responsible for 9/11, they are not the only terrorist orgainization out there, and it has been repeatedly demonstrated that Hussein and his regime supported terrorists.
My "attitude has started a conventional form of World War III...." So, it was this attitude that caused the first bombing of WTC and the Cole? Which president was that under, I forget.
Let's look back a bit at some history. How did Hitler get as far as he did without someone stepping in? It was liberal elitists like yourself who decided it "wasn't their problem" and looked the other way until it was almost too late.
It frightens me that you sympathize with terrorists solely becuase you hate Bush: ". .
Let's see, what's next? "... all this could have been averted if your Beloved Leader King George had actually tried to find and prosecute Osama bin Laden . . .
"You aren't fooling anyone except about 75% of Bush voters." Ok, I'm not trying to fool anyone. I look at the facts (do you?) and form opinions, not the other way around. Second, from which orifice did you pull 75%, and what does it mean? Third, in what way has " the world has already judged your asinine Imperial policies"? The nations that were against us invading Iraq are now being shown to have something to hide. Chirac has been found with his hand in the cookie jar along with UN officials skimming the Oil for Food program, then using his influence in the region to keep the other nations out of it. It has also been recently discovered that Russia was supplying them with weapons and explosives, and conducted a covert operation to move those explosives to Syria at the last minute. So now "the world" becomes suspect in its judgement of the US. So, who is guilty of imperial practices?
Yes, it frightens me that you feel that a suitcase nuke in NYC is now justified becuase of your biased view of the world. You say it's "my" policies that create all evil in the world, but I say it's "your" policies that look the other way while it builds.
*shudder*
*sigh* First, Yeah, I got the reference about the president talking about the wrong Abu. You're very smart to watch TV and having it spoon fed to you. I'm wondering if you caught that yourself or after the media pointed it out. Second, I did "give a shit" about the Iraquis back in the 80s; did you? Do you currently "give a shit" or are you just pissed off that we have a president that "gives a shit?" Where do you get off telling me what I have or have not done over the past 20 years?
Ok, first of all "fucknut" isn't even a word. Second, it's amazing to think that what happens "over there" has no bearing on what happens in your happy place where genocide and atrocities apparently don't intrude. Enjoy that while you can.
I'll bet ol' W knows the difference between 'then' and 'than'. So what you're saying is the best way to go about it is to go in, kick butt, pull out, and let the dictator stay behind to continue murdering hundreds of thousands of his own people, including women and children (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3738 368.stm).
I know, I know, so long as your job isn't outsourced, you're happy.