Every media outlet is *extremely* biased against Bob Barr. He got virtually no coverage.
Is it because the media has an anti-libertarian bias? No, it's because that isn't who the public wants to hear about.
"Give the people what they want." I think the fact that Obama was the more popular candidate may have influenced the increase of media coverage about him, in the same way that media coverage influences opinions. It's a vicious cycle, and the end result is that once someone gets into the spotlight, he tends to stay there.
Celebrity gossip works the same way. Paris Hilton's exploits are only stories because the media follows her. News outlets are entertainment sources too, and they go where the gossip is. I don't see how any sense of responsibility to democracy fits into that mission, so there's no reason to expect "unbiased" coverage.
Just got back from voting in Fulton County GA. Not a lot of people, no line whatsoever. About 10 Diebold machines.
Using the machine did not inspire me to put much faith in it. The interface has the look and feel of a Swing application. It takes about half a second to load each page of the ballot, during which you can watch each box render one by one. How can you get such bad performance from a single-purpose device?
Process is the key word there. Imperfection of the Constitution does not mean that it's okay to break the rules at will. Amend the Constitution FIRST if you think it's wrong, THEN pass whatever legislation it previously clashed with. That's the process. Without it, there may as well be no constitution at all.
Even if he was looking for something to hack, he didn't do any damage.
Not true - Any unauthorized access is "damage" because it requires expending time (read: money) to assess the situation and determine whether any "real" damage was done.
Look at it from the admin's perspective. Someone broke into your system. He claims that he didn't do anything bad while he was there. You can't just take his word on that - it has to be investigated.
That said, it's a rather bureaucratic way of looking at things, and the overall result of the scenario (discovery of security problems) may be advantageous. But you have to realize that is how people see it.
1) Maine doesn't like Vista. 2) Maine can't know much about Windows 7 because it doesn't exist yet. 3) ????? 4) Maine decides it will switch to Windows 7. 5) Profit! (for Microsoft)
So, step 3 may entail:
a) Someone getting a bribe. b) Someone realizing how happy Microsoft products have made them in the past, and assuming the Vista problems must have been a one-time fluke. c) Someone thinking that "operating system" means "Windows".
Yeah, "1st-party" is definitely the only way to go. Time has shown that "the community" sucks at making software. This silly OSS fad is no match for paying a crapload of money to Apple.
I thought the point of the open SDK was to *change* this notion that the phone and the software that comes with it are synonymous.
Encryption does pose a new situation which was unfathomable at the time the Fifth Amendment was drafted, and I can't believe no one is even considering this.
A big problem with forced self-incrimination is that you can torture someone into admitting to something they didn't do. But there is no such thing as a "false" encryption key. The question is "what is on this hard drive", and it is impossible for the defendant to give any untrue answer by providing an incorrect key.
Now, I'm just playing a little devil's advocate here, and I'm not trying to convince anyone that you should have to give up your encryption keys. But please, if you're going to participate in this argument, at least acknowledge that cryptography provides a unique characteristic to the requested information: it is verifiable. You have to have some appreciation, at least on a purely mathematical level, of how this is fundamentally different.
A subsequent question would be, can you live with a job that you've sued your way into keeping? The idea of legally contesting a dismissal has always bothered me. The company doesn't want you there anymore, and the state/nation has decreed they have to let you stay... that has to be awkward.
Maybe I'm being naive, but this seems like something that you could just bring up with management? The boss hopefully cares about employee opinions to some degree anyway, and I doubt you'll face the axe just for posing a carefully-worded "what if I were to refuse" question.
I think one big reason universities concentrate on Computer Science is because that's what school is good for - theory. To make a very broad generalization: whatever you learn in academia, it will probably not be directly applicable in the real world. That's the nature of the beast.
I can't speak for its success yet, but I feel good about what I'm doing right now. Go to school mostly for math and science, and pick up a lot of the engineering concepts from job experience.
Why do people put up with this?... There should be a class action suit over this.
Somewhat fitting that the article author's name is Rearden (well, Reardon, but close enough). Verizon didn't set the cost of text messages; the market (all of us) did. It's not something you get to complain about. It's something you either buy, or don't.
Isn't "legacy" the only reason that customers hang onto Windows in the first place, though? Businesses have all their documents in MS Office format, grandma only knows how to send email on Outlook, and everyone else wants to play their Windows-only games.
I think redesigning Windows would be a foolish move, because legacy support is the only thing it currently has going for it. If members of the Windows audience are going to completely switch OS, why wouldn't they pick one of the free ones?
I don't understand the point of the trademark technicalities in this case. The Germans already know that Google's email product is called Gmail. Everyone they know in the rest of the world will still be calling it Gmail.
The <title> on some browsers may change, but will anyone stop calling it Gmail?
Amen to that - my answer to tech support inquiries these days is "I don't support Windows". I'd rather be helpful, and I wouldn't mind Linux becoming mainstream. The problem is that I really don't know how to debug Windows boxes. The only time I can be of use is when the problem is just that the user needs to find some option buried in Microsoft GUIs, and they're too intimidated to poke around themselves. When something is actually wrong, and your all-in-one "it just works" appliance doesn't work, what can you do except maybe try to get a refund for it?
THIS is why Linux is generally a better solution yet doesn't take off - It has a high setup cost and easier maintainability, whereas Windows setups work from the start and degrade over time. The Linux box will work better in the long run, but we're short-sighted individuals.
The first and most major result of such experiments is to show that no "religious experiences" can be trusted as personal proof of an almighty being.
Actually, they're creating real religious experiences. What this experiment proves is that God loves this helmet and will pay a lovely visit to anyone who wears it.
And what, might I ask, is wrong with a little price gouging? People obviously want to send text messages, so service providers should charge as much as users are willing to pay for them.
Slashdot Mirror
Every media outlet is *extremely* biased against Bob Barr. He got virtually no coverage.
Is it because the media has an anti-libertarian bias? No, it's because that isn't who the public wants to hear about.
"Give the people what they want." I think the fact that Obama was the more popular candidate may have influenced the increase of media coverage about him, in the same way that media coverage influences opinions. It's a vicious cycle, and the end result is that once someone gets into the spotlight, he tends to stay there.
Celebrity gossip works the same way. Paris Hilton's exploits are only stories because the media follows her. News outlets are entertainment sources too, and they go where the gossip is. I don't see how any sense of responsibility to democracy fits into that mission, so there's no reason to expect "unbiased" coverage.
Just got back from voting in Fulton County GA. Not a lot of people, no line whatsoever. About 10 Diebold machines.
Using the machine did not inspire me to put much faith in it. The interface has the look and feel of a Swing application. It takes about half a second to load each page of the ballot, during which you can watch each box render one by one. How can you get such bad performance from a single-purpose device?
Voting for either of them - that's what doesn't make sense.
Process is the key word there. Imperfection of the Constitution does not mean that it's okay to break the rules at will. Amend the Constitution FIRST if you think it's wrong, THEN pass whatever legislation it previously clashed with. That's the process. Without it, there may as well be no constitution at all.
Not true - Any unauthorized access is "damage" because it requires expending time (read: money) to assess the situation and determine whether any "real" damage was done.
Look at it from the admin's perspective. Someone broke into your system. He claims that he didn't do anything bad while he was there. You can't just take his word on that - it has to be investigated.
That said, it's a rather bureaucratic way of looking at things, and the overall result of the scenario (discovery of security problems) may be advantageous. But you have to realize that is how people see it.
You realize this is a discussion about theft by TSA personnel, right?
To be fair, Ubuntu does take a lot of crap for being the wrong shade of brown.
Moreover, I would hope that he is prosecuted to the exact same extent that Sarah Palin would be for hacking my Yahoo mail account.
Of course, this is assuming I have a Yahoo mail account, Palin knows how to hack it, and that we have a reasonably fair justice system.
Let me get this straight...
1) Maine doesn't like Vista.
2) Maine can't know much about Windows 7 because it doesn't exist yet.
3) ?????
4) Maine decides it will switch to Windows 7.
5) Profit! (for Microsoft)
So, step 3 may entail:
a) Someone getting a bribe.
b) Someone realizing how happy Microsoft products have made them in the past, and assuming the Vista problems must have been a one-time fluke.
c) Someone thinking that "operating system" means "Windows".
Actually, this is odd - do a current Google search for "9/10" and "9/12", and you'll get 0.9 and 0.75.
Search for "9/11", and Google calculator does not respond.
Did Google intentionally set this up so we cannot calculate nine elevenths?
Isn't that what every other OS already does (with some kind of package manager like apt - except that apt-get is easier to use than Windows Update)?
Yeah, "1st-party" is definitely the only way to go. Time has shown that "the community" sucks at making software. This silly OSS fad is no match for paying a crapload of money to Apple.
I thought the point of the open SDK was to *change* this notion that the phone and the software that comes with it are synonymous.
It's a katamari?
Encryption does pose a new situation which was unfathomable at the time the Fifth Amendment was drafted, and I can't believe no one is even considering this.
A big problem with forced self-incrimination is that you can torture someone into admitting to something they didn't do. But there is no such thing as a "false" encryption key. The question is "what is on this hard drive", and it is impossible for the defendant to give any untrue answer by providing an incorrect key.
Now, I'm just playing a little devil's advocate here, and I'm not trying to convince anyone that you should have to give up your encryption keys. But please, if you're going to participate in this argument, at least acknowledge that cryptography provides a unique characteristic to the requested information: it is verifiable. You have to have some appreciation, at least on a purely mathematical level, of how this is fundamentally different.
A subsequent question would be, can you live with a job that you've sued your way into keeping? The idea of legally contesting a dismissal has always bothered me. The company doesn't want you there anymore, and the state/nation has decreed they have to let you stay... that has to be awkward.
Maybe I'm being naive, but this seems like something that you could just bring up with management? The boss hopefully cares about employee opinions to some degree anyway, and I doubt you'll face the axe just for posing a carefully-worded "what if I were to refuse" question.
I think one big reason universities concentrate on Computer Science is because that's what school is good for - theory. To make a very broad generalization: whatever you learn in academia, it will probably not be directly applicable in the real world. That's the nature of the beast.
I can't speak for its success yet, but I feel good about what I'm doing right now. Go to school mostly for math and science, and pick up a lot of the engineering concepts from job experience.
Somewhat fitting that the article author's name is Rearden (well, Reardon, but close enough). Verizon didn't set the cost of text messages; the market (all of us) did. It's not something you get to complain about. It's something you either buy, or don't.
That may have made sense "back in the day", but in this wacky Web 2.0 world, I don't think there is enough static content for it to be worthwhile.
Isn't "legacy" the only reason that customers hang onto Windows in the first place, though? Businesses have all their documents in MS Office format, grandma only knows how to send email on Outlook, and everyone else wants to play their Windows-only games.
I think redesigning Windows would be a foolish move, because legacy support is the only thing it currently has going for it. If members of the Windows audience are going to completely switch OS, why wouldn't they pick one of the free ones?
I don't understand the point of the trademark technicalities in this case. The Germans already know that Google's email product is called Gmail. Everyone they know in the rest of the world will still be calling it Gmail.
The <title> on some browsers may change, but will anyone stop calling it Gmail?
My dreams of being an Olympic runner were crushed because of a condition that I have: I can't run very fast.
I could probably overcome this challenge with sufficient technology, if they'd only let me. But it wouldn't be an inspirational story.
Amen to that - my answer to tech support inquiries these days is "I don't support Windows". I'd rather be helpful, and I wouldn't mind Linux becoming mainstream. The problem is that I really don't know how to debug Windows boxes. The only time I can be of use is when the problem is just that the user needs to find some option buried in Microsoft GUIs, and they're too intimidated to poke around themselves. When something is actually wrong, and your all-in-one "it just works" appliance doesn't work, what can you do except maybe try to get a refund for it?
THIS is why Linux is generally a better solution yet doesn't take off - It has a high setup cost and easier maintainability, whereas Windows setups work from the start and degrade over time. The Linux box will work better in the long run, but we're short-sighted individuals.
And what, might I ask, is wrong with a little price gouging? People obviously want to send text messages, so service providers should charge as much as users are willing to pay for them.
Figures. Slashdotters always carry these jokes on far too long.