From TFA: "Those that would give up essential liberties in pursuit in a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security," said Sen. John Sununu, R-New Hampshire.
Don't worry, Sununu didn't come up with that quote on his own. That's copied verbatim from Ben Franklin. Someone screwed up citing that.
Somehow Google doesn't seem like the type to conform to a bad product/standard, just because most of the world uses it. This is either another nail in the coffin of IE, or just one more thing to be "fixed" in the next service pack.
Is anyone else noticing that the Google Maps Widget doesn't work on the sattelite mode anymore?
And does anyone know if a revision for the widget to support the hybrid view in the works?
Agreed that Hussein is not the most pleasent man ever, and probably should be shot, but when you use the whole "gassing his own people" thing, you also have to look at where the technology for that came from, namely the United States in the 80's. And if you look to all the corrupt and evil heads of state the US has propped up over the past half century, this is really a double standard that Saddam is being held to. And furthermore, if you've been reading the news lately from Iraq, corruption is up in most of the government, and many people are actually worse off. While Saddam certainly was bad news for Iraq, dropping thousands of tons of bombs on their country was probably worse.
NPR carried this story on yesterday's Morning Edition
http://www.npr.org/rundowns/rundown.php?prgDate=07 -Dec-2004&prgId=3
About half way down the page.
Let's please try to not slashdot NPR...
I have read numorous reports about the credibility (or lack thereof) and about the bias of some of Wikipedia's articles. If Wikipedia launches a news service, I think there is an even greater opportunity for individuals to interject their personal opinions into things that many people believe as the truth.
If anyone can submit a news story, there will be many biased or one sided stories. Wikipedia tries to avoid this in its main encyclopedia by hoping that other users will correct any biases in the articles. With news however, it is often not enough time to go through and check each fact. I don't think that Wiki can rely on user editing to insure "fair and balanced" stories.
While we all love the idea of hitting back at spammers, I don't think this practice should be condoned. I think that these attacks (whether you want to call them DDoS or not and whether they are illegal or not) have _way_ too much potential for abuse.
Most people are more than willing to turn a blind eye towards attacks on spammers, but it could easily go further than that. Anything that people really don't like (Microsoft, www.anti-slash.org, the IRS, the White House website) could be a target for similar attacks.
While many people might see that as just a prank, it's not too difficult to see a slide to Mafia-style protectionism, where if you don't do X, you will get shut down.
Just MHO.
Slashdot Mirror
From TFA:
"Those that would give up essential liberties in pursuit in a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security," said Sen. John Sununu, R-New Hampshire.
Don't worry, Sununu didn't come up with that quote on his own. That's copied verbatim from Ben Franklin. Someone screwed up citing that.
I've just been using one from the apple website. http://www.apple.com/downloads/dashboard/transport ation/googlemapswidget.html/
I just keep it tucked in the top corner, so the only time it takes up more than a tiny sliver is when I am using it, and then generally do not need to see the ones underneath.
Somehow Google doesn't seem like the type to conform to a bad product/standard, just because most of the world uses it. This is either another nail in the coffin of IE, or just one more thing to be "fixed" in the next service pack.
Is anyone else noticing that the Google Maps Widget doesn't work on the sattelite mode anymore? And does anyone know if a revision for the widget to support the hybrid view in the works?
Agreed that Hussein is not the most pleasent man ever, and probably should be shot, but when you use the whole "gassing his own people" thing, you also have to look at where the technology for that came from, namely the United States in the 80's. And if you look to all the corrupt and evil heads of state the US has propped up over the past half century, this is really a double standard that Saddam is being held to. And furthermore, if you've been reading the news lately from Iraq, corruption is up in most of the government, and many people are actually worse off. While Saddam certainly was bad news for Iraq, dropping thousands of tons of bombs on their country was probably worse.
NPR carried this story on yesterday's Morning Edition http://www.npr.org/rundowns/rundown.php?prgDate=07 -Dec-2004&prgId=3
About half way down the page.
Let's please try to not slashdot NPR...
I have read numorous reports about the credibility (or lack thereof) and about the bias of some of Wikipedia's articles. If Wikipedia launches a news service, I think there is an even greater opportunity for individuals to interject their personal opinions into things that many people believe as the truth. If anyone can submit a news story, there will be many biased or one sided stories. Wikipedia tries to avoid this in its main encyclopedia by hoping that other users will correct any biases in the articles. With news however, it is often not enough time to go through and check each fact. I don't think that Wiki can rely on user editing to insure "fair and balanced" stories.
While we all love the idea of hitting back at spammers, I don't think this practice should be condoned. I think that these attacks (whether you want to call them DDoS or not and whether they are illegal or not) have _way_ too much potential for abuse. Most people are more than willing to turn a blind eye towards attacks on spammers, but it could easily go further than that. Anything that people really don't like (Microsoft, www.anti-slash.org, the IRS, the White House website) could be a target for similar attacks. While many people might see that as just a prank, it's not too difficult to see a slide to Mafia-style protectionism, where if you don't do X, you will get shut down. Just MHO.