Words have no power to harm or help anyone on their own. It's how the hearer reacts to them that's important.
The fact that the words were crafted and placed there with intent to harm isn't important? Baseball bats have no power to harm or help anyone on their own. If I hit you with a baseball bat it's not my fault you got hurt. Obviously you should have dodged it or not have been standing there in the first place.
Not that much different. I intended to harm and did. You received the harm. Just because I where a black ski mask and you didn't do your research on how to avoid baseball bats doesn't make it my fault. You're responsible for your actions.
Just like you may be vulnerable to a carefully placed baseball bat, people are also vulnerable to carefully placed words. Not everyone can be an expert on everything. Not everyone can spot bullshit on every subject mater.
Sure the victims could do better to protect themselves to an extent. If you weren't walking down a dark alleyway I might not have hit you with that bat. That doesn't make me innocent just because you were dumb enough to go down the alleyway.
If I lie in court and a serial killer get off and kills again, is it the jury's fault for being dumb enough to believe the lie? After all "Words have no power to harm or help anyone on their own. It's how the hearer reacts to them that's important."
No, it's just as important that the words were deceitful in the first place. We shouldn't just wash our hands and say the victim was dumb.
If the reader is to already know it all then the Internet is useless as a medium for the exchange of information. Just because its difficult to regulate doesn't mean we should favor deregulation to the point of anarchy.
Just words? Why can't I publish slandering and libelous statements however and whenever I want?
Words aren't always harmless or victimless.
What if I published a cooking recipe, told you it was the best, implied that it was safe, you cooked it up... and now you have the shits. Worse than that, you are hospitalized because you have another condition that was significantly complicated by my harmless and victimless haha-gave-you-the-shits prank.
Now I'm not saying that anonymity is good or bad. I'm just saying that words aren't always harmless regardless of weather they are posted on the Internet or not.
Re:But does it run on .... shit that does not work
on
Fedora 10 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I've never really understood why Yum performance is really all that make or break important. I for one spend more time using the software installed than installing it. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but I don't spend all day every day installing and removing software.
If I use OpenOffice a lot and notice that it's significantly slower on one distro in particular, that would be more of a deciding factor than how long it took to install OpenOffice.
My response was mainly to "Not sure about the linux flavors." I'm sure about at least a few of them, and while I haven't tried all flavors I would venture they are roughly the same.
At risk of sounding like an advocacy cheerleader, let me grab that token again and say that I don't have to gut my system to get performance out of it. In fact, I run more services than the out of the box configuration. Things like MySQL, a full server package, for example. It doesn't slow me down in a noticeable way.
To your question, I don't know that there is a way to make Windows hold off a bit before displaying the Desktop. You can, as I'm sure you know, reduce the amount of time you spend waiting for the system to become usable.
I used to spend hours figuring out ways to do that too.:P Now I spend hours of time trying to do other things... some of which are much easier to do in Windows.
The point is that you come off as very confident (overly so maybe?) that you are absolutely correct. Its funny because you are also bent on the notion that overconfidence will screw you.
Type LOL and let it slide not everyone gets infinite recursion the first time around.
Velociraptors are extinct much like the languages which had no other means but to use goto's.
BASIC was the largest offender. Everyone had it and did it back then. For many it was their first language. Being limited to goto's and no formatting other than line numbers, its no wonder these programmers had a rough start with some of the more refined languages.
BASIC was bad not because it used goto's, but because it did so rather exclusively. But nobody uses BASIC (in classic form) anymore. So the need for such disdain for goto's isn't necessary anymore because it is no longer such a defining bad influence which everyone starts with.
Somewhere about 30mins in it talks about the volume of data, bandwidth, tapes, etc. I recommend watching the whole video. There's a lot of interesting bits all throughout about data collection distribution and processing.
Yes, large scale indeed.:)
Off-topic side note: Python, C++, and Linux are mentioned as significant technologies.
Recommend those curious read O'Reilly's definition
That definition is 5 pages long. No wonder no one knows what it is. Or perhaps "definition" is not really the word you're looking. "Description" would perhaps be a better word.
From the O'Reilly article:
"Like many important concepts, Web 2.0 doesn't have a hard boundary, but rather, a gravitational core."
Sounds kinda fuzzy to me. At any rate it's kind of like the words "gay" and "hacker." They don't mean what they used to mean and you can't really do much about that. Use different wording if you want to be understood.
Don't do it! I have one of those special hole punchers... I punched up 5 holes in my Vista certificate of authenticity thinking I'd scam my way into a free side of Office.... nope WGA escorted me out of the store. How was I to know that they switched from bunnies to hearts!!??
"We are the Borg. Lower your shields and surrender your ships. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile."
Who wants to go back to the world of driver hunting?
Huh? Most products either work out of the box on Windows or come with a driver for it in the box. Even if it doesn't (I've never see it) how hard is it to find the manufacturer's web sight and download one?
I've never had to do this "hunting" thing you're talking about when I used Windows. I have on Linux, didn't find shit, but I did hunt for quite a while. I've seen the end user have to do everything from compile the driver to recompiling the kernel, to get some hardware working on Linux.
Sorry, but I'm gonna have to wave the bullshit flag on this "hunting" thing that I would have to do if I went Windows again. There are good reasons to leave Windows, but this just isn't one of them.
1. You don't need a physical link for classified material to end up on an unclassified machine (network). All you need is an idiot and a keyboard. 2. "Unclassified" doesn't mean the same thing as "cannot be used to harm." They had access to entire email boxes. That's enough to select and profile a weak target for the social engineering aspect often involved in defeating security systems. That's just for starters. 3. Why would you ever consider attack on your organizations systems anything other than harmful?
Yes, having multiple physically separate networks is a nice security feature. But, nothing will save you from bad users. Security does matter on unclassified machines. Security IS an activity the WHOLE organization has to be on board with.
1) Intrusion Detection Software 2) Decent firewall alerting you to connections to chinese IP space, 3) network anomaly detection software
When did these things start coming with Windows? Not even server editions of Windows come with that stuff. However, I can think of a competing OS that does ship with these wonderful things.
4) patching your damn boxes!
Sure thing. I'm not going to say heads shouldn't have already rolled over there at the DOD IT Department Department. Heck, even the idiotic users should be slapped around a bit. But--deep breath--what if MS servers DID come with nice IDS and Firewall software? Maybe graduates of the "I'm a Windows administrator" class would know a few more things to double-click. Maybe.
If its so well established that these things are necessary, why doesn't Microsoft include them? Call me a troll. Yeah, I blame Microsoft as well for not including powerful network security tools.
blame the admins...............check, check, check blame the user.................check derogatory references to DOD...check blame Microsoft................check state you that are trolling....check
The problem is not that they lowered the requirements but it's how they lowered the requirements. Instead of refining or redesigning the software they refined what got printed on the box and left it at that.
Dude, you are sooo behind the power curve! We're on IE7 and I hear they're working on IE8. Yeah man we'll have 8 interwebs then. I don't even know if they have enough tubes for that yet. Kinda blows your mind when you think about it eh? Like when Al Gore invented it all, we were like "whoa man, just whoa." Life just keeps getting cooler, you know.
Slashdot Mirror
Meanwhile Linux has excellent memory management (no constant, nonstop, swap file IO) and tickless kernels.
Windows is not free. Not as in beer. Not as in freedom.
But then again, if you want free, the bulk of free software runs on Linux just as well and often better than Windows.
I guess the point would be to avoid products from Microsoft.
The fact that the words were crafted and placed there with intent to harm isn't important? Baseball bats have no power to harm or help anyone on their own. If I hit you with a baseball bat it's not my fault you got hurt. Obviously you should have dodged it or not have been standing there in the first place.
Not that much different. I intended to harm and did. You received the harm. Just because I where a black ski mask and you didn't do your research on how to avoid baseball bats doesn't make it my fault. You're responsible for your actions.
Just like you may be vulnerable to a carefully placed baseball bat, people are also vulnerable to carefully placed words. Not everyone can be an expert on everything. Not everyone can spot bullshit on every subject mater.
Sure the victims could do better to protect themselves to an extent. If you weren't walking down a dark alleyway I might not have hit you with that bat. That doesn't make me innocent just because you were dumb enough to go down the alleyway.
If I lie in court and a serial killer get off and kills again, is it the jury's fault for being dumb enough to believe the lie? After all "Words have no power to harm or help anyone on their own. It's how the hearer reacts to them that's important."
No, it's just as important that the words were deceitful in the first place. We shouldn't just wash our hands and say the victim was dumb.
If the reader is to already know it all then the Internet is useless as a medium for the exchange of information. Just because its difficult to regulate doesn't mean we should favor deregulation to the point of anarchy.
Just words? Why can't I publish slandering and libelous statements however and whenever I want?
Words aren't always harmless or victimless.
What if I published a cooking recipe, told you it was the best, implied that it was safe, you cooked it up... and now you have the shits. Worse than that, you are hospitalized because you have another condition that was significantly complicated by my harmless and victimless haha-gave-you-the-shits prank.
Now I'm not saying that anonymity is good or bad. I'm just saying that words aren't always harmless regardless of weather they are posted on the Internet or not.
I've never really understood why Yum performance is really all that make or break important. I for one spend more time using the software installed than installing it. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but I don't spend all day every day installing and removing software.
If I use OpenOffice a lot and notice that it's significantly slower on one distro in particular, that would be more of a deciding factor than how long it took to install OpenOffice.
My response was mainly to "Not sure about the linux flavors." I'm sure about at least a few of them, and while I haven't tried all flavors I would venture they are roughly the same.
At risk of sounding like an advocacy cheerleader, let me grab that token again and say that I don't have to gut my system to get performance out of it. In fact, I run more services than the out of the box configuration. Things like MySQL, a full server package, for example. It doesn't slow me down in a noticeable way.
To your question, I don't know that there is a way to make Windows hold off a bit before displaying the Desktop. You can, as I'm sure you know, reduce the amount of time you spend waiting for the system to become usable.
I used to spend hours figuring out ways to do that too. :P Now I spend hours of time trying to do other things... some of which are much easier to do in Windows.
My Linux box does none of that. The only thing my Linux box does slower than XP is run Windows software (games take bad FPS drops).
Don't get me wrong, I do think there are many things a Linux/GNU system could do better, but speed and efficiency seldom makes it to my gripe list.
My desktop environment not only shows up faster, but I can start using it just about as fast as it renders itself.
I am confident you do not have a sense of humor.
The point is that you come off as very confident (overly so maybe?) that you are absolutely correct. Its funny because you are also bent on the notion that overconfidence will screw you.
Type LOL and let it slide not everyone gets infinite recursion the first time around.
Overconfidence never leads to good places.
How sure are you about this?
Velociraptors are extinct much like the languages which had no other means but to use goto's.
BASIC was the largest offender. Everyone had it and did it back then. For many it was their first language. Being limited to goto's and no formatting other than line numbers, its no wonder these programmers had a rough start with some of the more refined languages.
BASIC was bad not because it used goto's, but because it did so rather exclusively. But nobody uses BASIC (in classic form) anymore. So the need for such disdain for goto's isn't necessary anymore because it is no longer such a defining bad influence which everyone starts with.
The velociraptors are dead.
Supersymmetry, Extra Dimensions and the Origin of Mass - 73 min
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3407710188844062148&hl=en
Somewhere about 30mins in it talks about the volume of data, bandwidth, tapes, etc. I recommend watching the whole video. There's a lot of interesting bits all throughout about data collection distribution and processing.
Yes, large scale indeed. :)
Off-topic side note: Python, C++, and Linux are mentioned as significant technologies.
So you mean Linux has the potential to end more than just the Microsoft World? :P
bah... I'm gonna take the rest of the day off... nothing good can come from me today.
What if I fork it and begin the name with a K or maybe a G?
Doh.
Microsoft doesn't get it. Most people don't get how open source projects work.
Open source projects improve (or are influenced most) by getting patches accepted to the project.
Microsoft is full of developers, developers, developers. Why not just submit some patches that improve blender's performance on Windows?
Google did that with Wine. They wanted Picasa to work in Wine. Guess what they did. They threw money and patches at it.
Take a look at the kernel and how it has changed because companies wanted it to do something and submitted patches. That's how it works.
Microsoft is a software company that somehow can't figure out how to submit a patch. Sad. Patch up or shut up.
That definition is 5 pages long. No wonder no one knows what it is. Or perhaps "definition" is not really the word you're looking. "Description" would perhaps be a better word.
From the O'Reilly article:
Sounds kinda fuzzy to me. At any rate it's kind of like the words "gay" and "hacker." They don't mean what they used to mean and you can't really do much about that. Use different wording if you want to be understood.
The term "Web 2.0" has been pwnt.
Contrast
1. Security vulnerability discovered
2. Anti-vulnerability software gains detection
3. ???
4. Profit
vs
1. Security vulnerability discovered
2. bug report issued to affected software's development process.
4. defective software fixed.
5. ???
6. ???
7. ???
8. Will code HTML for food?
I'm just say'n.
Huh? Most products either work out of the box on Windows or come with a driver for it in the box. Even if it doesn't (I've never see it) how hard is it to find the manufacturer's web sight and download one?
I've never had to do this "hunting" thing you're talking about when I used Windows. I have on Linux, didn't find shit, but I did hunt for quite a while. I've seen the end user have to do everything from compile the driver to recompiling the kernel, to get some hardware working on Linux.
Sorry, but I'm gonna have to wave the bullshit flag on this "hunting" thing that I would have to do if I went Windows again. There are good reasons to leave Windows, but this just isn't one of them.
1. You don't need a physical link for classified material to end up on an unclassified machine (network). All you need is an idiot and a keyboard.
2. "Unclassified" doesn't mean the same thing as "cannot be used to harm." They had access to entire email boxes. That's enough to select and profile a weak target for the social engineering aspect often involved in defeating security systems. That's just for starters.
3. Why would you ever consider attack on your organizations systems anything other than harmful?
Yes, having multiple physically separate networks is a nice security feature. But, nothing will save you from bad users. Security does matter on unclassified machines. Security IS an activity the WHOLE organization has to be on board with.
When did these things start coming with Windows? Not even server editions of Windows come with that stuff. However, I can think of a competing OS that does ship with these wonderful things.
Sure thing. I'm not going to say heads shouldn't have already rolled over there at the DOD IT Department Department. Heck, even the idiotic users should be slapped around a bit. But--deep breath--what if MS servers DID come with nice IDS and Firewall software? Maybe graduates of the "I'm a Windows administrator" class would know a few more things to double-click. Maybe.
If its so well established that these things are necessary, why doesn't Microsoft include them? Call me a troll. Yeah, I blame Microsoft as well for not including powerful network security tools.
I think we're done here.
The problem is not that they lowered the requirements but it's how they lowered the requirements. Instead of refining or redesigning the software they refined what got printed on the box and left it at that.
Dude, you are sooo behind the power curve! We're on IE7 and I hear they're working on IE8. Yeah man we'll have 8 interwebs then. I don't even know if they have enough tubes for that yet. Kinda blows your mind when you think about it eh? Like when Al Gore invented it all, we were like "whoa man, just whoa." Life just keeps getting cooler, you know.