v.5.35 was the last good version. The installer for that one still let you choose what parts to install. You could easily omit all the bundled crapware like "Sonic burning engine". After 5.35, the installer was dumbed down.
FTA: An IBM spokesman told Politico, "While we support what Mr. Goodlatte's trying to do on trolls, if the CBM is included, we'd be forced to oppose the bill."
What about the hundreds of thousands of small developers who support it?
Do they get a "vote", too... or is it only the people who are rich enough to bribe senators?
I'm saying you must have done something, not necessarily violently changing lanes every few seconds (as "swerving" might suggest), but *something* that he didn't like the look of.
Personally I am mostly OK with this. The next morning when you see the huge line of cars left behind because the drivers were drunk justifies it to me.
With a bit of luck the results of this survey will be used to help justify the introduction of driverless cars and to provide manufacturer immunity from lawsuits (unless massively gross negligence can be proved). If a few driverless cars do something stupid it's still a massive win compared to the daily carnage caused by meat-and-bone drivers. Lawyers need to be muzzled.
In the future there might be two classes of 'driving' license and a stringent test for people who want to touch the controls. People who drive drunk will naturally be prohibited from ever doing so and the roads will be safer as a result.
This is government though. Common sense doesn't apply.
Yes, my license to drive is conditional on me being sober. It does not give the government permission to harass me to see if I am sober without any evidence that I am not.
The math says that there's a very definite probability that you are.
If I were forced to choose either to believe in Santa Claus or this "anonymous" officer of justice of the United States of America, I rather believe in that fat guy in red clothing - and his leading reindeer with a bright shining nose
That doesn't mean he didn't cram it into the condom with shit-stained fingers...
Actually, I'm amazed anybody would snort/inject something that was mixed up in an old paint can, passed through the filthy hands/anuses of a drug-smuggling operation, cut with god-knows-what then sold on the street.
They've started locking the cabin doors since then. Also, the passengers wouldn't assume they were just going to have a detour through Cuba like in the old days.
Slashdot Mirror
Your loss.
v.5.35 was the last good version. The installer for that one still let you choose what parts to install. You could easily omit all the bundled crapware like "Sonic burning engine". After 5.35, the installer was dumbed down.
...or you could just get the "Lite" version.
Not as good as Winamp Lite.
What's "light weight" about that?
I'm going to stick with Winamp Lite.
FTA: An IBM spokesman told Politico, "While we support what Mr. Goodlatte's trying to do on trolls, if the CBM is included, we'd be forced to oppose the bill."
What about the hundreds of thousands of small developers who support it?
Do they get a "vote", too ... or is it only the people who are rich enough to bribe senators?
Then there's the another category which try to limit the power and have a polyfuse or something more smarter in place.
ALL USB sockets are required to have a polyfuse, it's part of the specification.
Whether they're 500mA or 2A or whatever is another matter, but they have to have them.
I'm saying you must have done something, not necessarily violently changing lanes every few seconds (as "swerving" might suggest), but *something* that he didn't like the look of.
If they can get permission it's much less likely you can contest the PC in court.
The question is, how they managed to do this despite of Microsoft Economical Power. How they avoided bribery of the involved politicians?
Because a lot of the people in power are from the Green party, not ex-bankers/lawyers.
The reason they pulled me over is because they "saw me swerving". I was doing nothing of the sort.
That's what you think.
Sure, if they didn't make it feel involuntary they'd have gone home with zero samples....
Personally I am mostly OK with this. The next morning when you see the huge line of cars left behind because the drivers were drunk justifies it to me.
With a bit of luck the results of this survey will be used to help justify the introduction of driverless cars and to provide manufacturer immunity from lawsuits (unless massively gross negligence can be proved). If a few driverless cars do something stupid it's still a massive win compared to the daily carnage caused by meat-and-bone drivers. Lawyers need to be muzzled.
In the future there might be two classes of 'driving' license and a stringent test for people who want to touch the controls. People who drive drunk will naturally be prohibited from ever doing so and the roads will be safer as a result.
This is government though. Common sense doesn't apply.
Yes, my license to drive is conditional on me being sober. It does not give the government permission to harass me to see if I am sober without any evidence that I am not.
The math says that there's a very definite probability that you are.
That is all true, but it does not give the government the right to stop and search me without probable cause.
If some percentage of people on the road are drunk at any given time, there's a probability that it's you.
They're within the bounds of 'probable' so long as they don't search your trunk and glovebox.
But yeah contractors doing it is pretty dodgy.
I don't get the fuss over the word "contractors". Does it matter if they're permanently employed by the government or not?
The NSA has resources well beyond what are available to the rest of us -
Yawn. This myth has been debunked millions of times now.
Short version: Brute-force of 128-bit encryption cannot be done.
Longer version: The laws of thermodynamics are what prevent it, not the size of the NSA's budget.
Have the policemen standing outside the embassy been sent home?
The headline is a pretty strained summary of his quote.
The quote says: "If Assange came to the U.S. today, he would not be arrested"
It says nothing about tomorrow, or that new evidence wont be 'discovered' ten seconds after he arrives.
If I were forced to choose either to believe in Santa Claus or this "anonymous" officer of justice of the United States of America, I rather believe in that fat guy in red clothing - and his leading reindeer with a bright shining nose
Admiral Ackbar speaks about it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4F4qzPbcFiA
(nerd points if you know what he was going to say...)
I bet you could hide a couple of bullets in your mouth long enough to get past the TSA.
That doesn't mean he didn't cram it into the condom with shit-stained fingers...
Actually, I'm amazed anybody would snort/inject something that was mixed up in an old paint can, passed through the filthy hands/anuses of a drug-smuggling operation, cut with god-knows-what then sold on the street.
Yes.
They've started locking the cabin doors since then. Also, the passengers wouldn't assume they were just going to have a detour through Cuba like in the old days.
Instead you have the rise of local "affiliates" focused on local issues.
Sounds like the terrorists in The Life Of Brian:
"Are you the Judean People's Front?"
"Nah, we're the People's Front Of Judea."
"Where's the Judean People's Front, then?"
"That's him, sat over there..."
Things would change if people really believed that terrorism was organized, not just another topic on TV.