Attacking another nation's embassy is very much an act of war, and Britain at that point is within its rights to do as little or as much as it sees fit, and proportional response has nothing to do with it. If the Iranian people suffer because Iran is cut off from the City of London, then perhaps all those billionaires who inhabit the higher echelons of the Iranian power structure should spend a little on their fellow countrymen, instead of squirreling it away as proof against the revolution that will see the Ayatollahs stuck on spits for the amusement of the crowds.
Because the current president of Iran has made numerous public declarations of wiping out Israel, and the regime is pursuing gaining nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them for some time now.
And how exactly would you Godwin yourself? By the late 1920s Germany was actually doing relatively well, admittedly with the help of the US and cheap credit, but still, the hard times post-WWI were over. What made Germany a basket case was the same thing that made most countries in the industrialized world basket cases at the time; the Depression.
At any rate, Britain had every right to cut off Iran from using its banks. In case you hadn't noticed, a bunch of Basij thugs smashed through the British embassy as Iranian police (doubtless the same guys that had been cracking skulls just a year before) stood by and watched. In other words, the Iranian regime used plain-clothed volunteer militiamen to attack what constitutes sovereign British territory.
That, my historically-challenged friend, does constitute an act of war.
Israel is just the loudest voice. The Saudis are just as keen to see the Ayatollahs taken down a notch. At any rate, it would be an air campaign (if it happens at all).
I'm dealing with an Exchange 2007 server with a busted OWA, and what I've found out is that the links between Exchange and IIS are so deep that a full recreation of OWA from scratch means reinstalling Exchange 2007.
In some cases, as with King Crimson and the Beatles, for instance, the record company basically ignored its contractual and fiduciary obligations and did whatever it wanted and basically said "Don't like it, sue us." Stealing is certainly wrong, whether it's some guy using Bittorrent or a big multinational company ignoring signed contracts and evading paying royalties or licensing songs for download when it does not in fact have the legal right to license said songs.
I thought it was a Mach kernel and a BSD userland. How exactly that's quintessentially different from me installed Cygwin on my Windows machine and calling it a Unix machine is beyond me.
No kidding. The whole "*nix" descriptor came about because there were operating systems that were actually licensed variants of Unix, and other systems that were Unix-like, but legally could not call themselves Unix. Unix vs. Unix-like was not a technical description, but rather a legal one. Since Linux supports pretty much all the major features found in actual Unix-based systems, for all intents and purposes it is a Unix variant, even if it is a rewrite.
The reason Windows, Mac OS and pretty much all consumer and small business OSs became successes is because they were cheap. DOS and Windows, in particular, became dominant because of the OEM ecosystem. Support and bugfixes? Microsoft support has always been expensive, and bugfixes for the operating system didn't even become widely distributed until Windows vulnerabilities reached a level where Microsoft was essentially forced to come up with Windows Updates to dole out its bugfixes in a much easier way. When I first started out administering Windows NT based systems, bugfixes only came regularly with service packs, or if you installed them based on advice from Microsoft directly or via KB articles, or because some guy on randomtechforum.com told you "yeah, KB28342818122 will fix your problem." And earlier versions of Windows sure the hell didn't even have that level of support. Windows 95 or Windows 3.1 were what they were and about the only way you would get updates is if it was shipped with some piece of software that needed to update a DLL or other support file.
It little or nothing to do with support. Until Linux came along and basic took the expensive licensing and support costs associated with most *nix operating systems, *nix vendors didn't even give a shit about the PC market, and regarded PCs as glorified terminals when and where they had to connect to *nix-based systems. Still, even on the old Xenix system I administered, there were updates available, the last one I remember installing around 1992 or 1993 was a patch to fix hard-coded originator host names in UUCP bangpaths (and if that doesn't date me, nothing does).
I'm not trying to justify piracy. I'm trying to point out that it has always struck me as the height of hypocrisy for record companies to bemoan piracy when they've been stealing from artists for years. The same goes for the movie industry, where Hollywood "accounting" would most likely, in any other industry, lead to lengthy prison sentences for embezzlement.
We are talking about a business here that has regularly ripped off its own artists. I keep up to date on Robert Fripp's struggles with UMG/Universal. They just do whatever they want, and when he demands accounting information and information on how songs that he never gave permission to be placed on download services ended up there, he basically enters that evil realm of lawyer/accountant double-talk.
However bad music piracy may be, the biggest pirates of them all have always been the record companies. They'll even try to steal of big name acts. Both Pink Floyd and the Beatles have had to go to court to retrieve royalties or to enforce contractual requirements.
Re:Without Napster we'd still be buying all CD's
on
Napster Being Shut Down
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Yeah, they just record twelve versions of the same song for each album. I swear that I cannot tell the difference between any Nickelback song. It's like if the Beatles only recorded dozens of variations of She Loves You.
Are you being intentionally dense. Yes, it's all 1s and 0s, but human beings can read text files, even pretty mangled ones, whereas binary files, depending on the format, becomes far more difficult.
I was getting a heavy hit on memory usage even with four or five tabs open. Firefox had memory usage issues for years that was never dealt with, other than the odd claim that "storing all that stuff in memory makes browser faster!" even as you watched your hard drive grinding constantly.
And that underlines the problem. Firefox developers have been too busy giving users what they think users should want, rather than what users want. I finally dropped them at version 4 and go back every once in a while and go "meh" and go back to Chrome.
gzip is a pretty small utility, just like all the other text-processing utilities. Beyond that, no system I've worked with gzips the active log file, just the archived ones. The active log remains uncompressed because if there is, for instance a file system corruption/crash, a compressed file is often rendered useless, whereas you can still have some hope of analyzing even a corrupted text file for clues.
So now on top of a crippled system, you've got to move the logs over to a system so you can read them? This is exactly what you're faced with when a Windows system takes a dive, and it sucks.
MySQL requires the daemon to be running, or at least access to some utility with the MySQL library. If a system has crashed or has reduced functionality due to system problems, a text log that can be scanned with the basic *nix stdio tools is a helluva lot more useful than a binary log.
I hate the Windows eventlog and binary logs in general precisely because they become rapidly less accessible the more issues a system has, which is quite often why you need to delve into syslog anyways. What exactly is the point to reinventing the wheel?
No matter your experience, plain-text logs make more sense, especially in *nix operating systems. You have a vast array of tools to search log files with; my favorites being tail and grep. The minute you go to binary logging your options shrink or you end up having to use additional tools to reconvert it to text (ie. the Windows event log).
Slashdot Mirror
Attacking another nation's embassy is very much an act of war, and Britain at that point is within its rights to do as little or as much as it sees fit, and proportional response has nothing to do with it. If the Iranian people suffer because Iran is cut off from the City of London, then perhaps all those billionaires who inhabit the higher echelons of the Iranian power structure should spend a little on their fellow countrymen, instead of squirreling it away as proof against the revolution that will see the Ayatollahs stuck on spits for the amusement of the crowds.
If I said, "Because of the evil Jewish conspiracy", would I be close to your answer?
They left out the slide where management get great big bonuses for being such swell thinkers.
Because the current president of Iran has made numerous public declarations of wiping out Israel, and the regime is pursuing gaining nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them for some time now.
And how exactly would you Godwin yourself? By the late 1920s Germany was actually doing relatively well, admittedly with the help of the US and cheap credit, but still, the hard times post-WWI were over. What made Germany a basket case was the same thing that made most countries in the industrialized world basket cases at the time; the Depression.
At any rate, Britain had every right to cut off Iran from using its banks. In case you hadn't noticed, a bunch of Basij thugs smashed through the British embassy as Iranian police (doubtless the same guys that had been cracking skulls just a year before) stood by and watched. In other words, the Iranian regime used plain-clothed volunteer militiamen to attack what constitutes sovereign British territory.
That, my historically-challenged friend, does constitute an act of war.
Israel is just the loudest voice. The Saudis are just as keen to see the Ayatollahs taken down a notch. At any rate, it would be an air campaign (if it happens at all).
Or perhaps to stick the barrel in his mouth and do a little self-inflicted IT renewal.
First of all, I didn't put the server or network together, I've been asked to do a bit of contracting.
Second of all, this is a small outfit that doesn't have the money to throw at a second Exchange server to run OWA.
Thirdly, no matter what way you toss it, the architecture is idiotic.
Fourth, I still hate Exchange. I tolerate it in my own shop simply because nothing else comes close, but it's still a gawdawful monstrous beast.
I'm dealing with an Exchange 2007 server with a busted OWA, and what I've found out is that the links between Exchange and IIS are so deep that a full recreation of OWA from scratch means reinstalling Exchange 2007.
I've come to loathe Exchange.
It's most certainly theft, and on top of that Godaddy is most certainly liable for civil damages.
In some cases, as with King Crimson and the Beatles, for instance, the record company basically ignored its contractual and fiduciary obligations and did whatever it wanted and basically said "Don't like it, sue us." Stealing is certainly wrong, whether it's some guy using Bittorrent or a big multinational company ignoring signed contracts and evading paying royalties or licensing songs for download when it does not in fact have the legal right to license said songs.
Can I make it any plainer than that?
I thought it was a Mach kernel and a BSD userland. How exactly that's quintessentially different from me installed Cygwin on my Windows machine and calling it a Unix machine is beyond me.
No kidding. The whole "*nix" descriptor came about because there were operating systems that were actually licensed variants of Unix, and other systems that were Unix-like, but legally could not call themselves Unix. Unix vs. Unix-like was not a technical description, but rather a legal one. Since Linux supports pretty much all the major features found in actual Unix-based systems, for all intents and purposes it is a Unix variant, even if it is a rewrite.
The reason Windows, Mac OS and pretty much all consumer and small business OSs became successes is because they were cheap. DOS and Windows, in particular, became dominant because of the OEM ecosystem. Support and bugfixes? Microsoft support has always been expensive, and bugfixes for the operating system didn't even become widely distributed until Windows vulnerabilities reached a level where Microsoft was essentially forced to come up with Windows Updates to dole out its bugfixes in a much easier way. When I first started out administering Windows NT based systems, bugfixes only came regularly with service packs, or if you installed them based on advice from Microsoft directly or via KB articles, or because some guy on randomtechforum.com told you "yeah, KB28342818122 will fix your problem." And earlier versions of Windows sure the hell didn't even have that level of support. Windows 95 or Windows 3.1 were what they were and about the only way you would get updates is if it was shipped with some piece of software that needed to update a DLL or other support file.
It little or nothing to do with support. Until Linux came along and basic took the expensive licensing and support costs associated with most *nix operating systems, *nix vendors didn't even give a shit about the PC market, and regarded PCs as glorified terminals when and where they had to connect to *nix-based systems. Still, even on the old Xenix system I administered, there were updates available, the last one I remember installing around 1992 or 1993 was a patch to fix hard-coded originator host names in UUCP bangpaths (and if that doesn't date me, nothing does).
Is there some particular reason you're being an ass?
I'm not trying to justify piracy. I'm trying to point out that it has always struck me as the height of hypocrisy for record companies to bemoan piracy when they've been stealing from artists for years. The same goes for the movie industry, where Hollywood "accounting" would most likely, in any other industry, lead to lengthy prison sentences for embezzlement.
We are talking about a business here that has regularly ripped off its own artists. I keep up to date on Robert Fripp's struggles with UMG/Universal. They just do whatever they want, and when he demands accounting information and information on how songs that he never gave permission to be placed on download services ended up there, he basically enters that evil realm of lawyer/accountant double-talk.
However bad music piracy may be, the biggest pirates of them all have always been the record companies. They'll even try to steal of big name acts. Both Pink Floyd and the Beatles have had to go to court to retrieve royalties or to enforce contractual requirements.
Yeah, they just record twelve versions of the same song for each album. I swear that I cannot tell the difference between any Nickelback song. It's like if the Beatles only recorded dozens of variations of She Loves You.
Are you being intentionally dense. Yes, it's all 1s and 0s, but human beings can read text files, even pretty mangled ones, whereas binary files, depending on the format, becomes far more difficult.
Nice! Thank you very much!
I was getting a heavy hit on memory usage even with four or five tabs open. Firefox had memory usage issues for years that was never dealt with, other than the odd claim that "storing all that stuff in memory makes browser faster!" even as you watched your hard drive grinding constantly.
And that underlines the problem. Firefox developers have been too busy giving users what they think users should want, rather than what users want. I finally dropped them at version 4 and go back every once in a while and go "meh" and go back to Chrome.
gzip is a pretty small utility, just like all the other text-processing utilities. Beyond that, no system I've worked with gzips the active log file, just the archived ones. The active log remains uncompressed because if there is, for instance a file system corruption/crash, a compressed file is often rendered useless, whereas you can still have some hope of analyzing even a corrupted text file for clues.
So now on top of a crippled system, you've got to move the logs over to a system so you can read them? This is exactly what you're faced with when a Windows system takes a dive, and it sucks.
MySQL requires the daemon to be running, or at least access to some utility with the MySQL library. If a system has crashed or has reduced functionality due to system problems, a text log that can be scanned with the basic *nix stdio tools is a helluva lot more useful than a binary log.
I hate the Windows eventlog and binary logs in general precisely because they become rapidly less accessible the more issues a system has, which is quite often why you need to delve into syslog anyways. What exactly is the point to reinventing the wheel?
No matter your experience, plain-text logs make more sense, especially in *nix operating systems. You have a vast array of tools to search log files with; my favorites being tail and grep. The minute you go to binary logging your options shrink or you end up having to use additional tools to reconvert it to text (ie. the Windows event log).