Perhaps the entire question of religion and its effect on societies could be better rephrased to ask if there's a religious framework out there that has demonstrated the best ability to curb violence and hatred.
Until MS figures out that permissions should be based on tasks, roles, and objects instead of who you log in as, all the stupid human tricks inthe world won't help them. It looks to me as though security in vista has the same thinking underpinning its design as NT/2K/XP - log in as admin to do admin things, and have permission to to anything.
I'm going to start using a totally fictitious term that sounds like it might be related to the Internet, like iWebby or something like that, and then see how long before the businessweeks start naming 'players', 'moguls', and 'leaders'.
Talk about form over substance.
I can see it now - "businessweek interview iWebby founder and lead VC. There no money - yet, but like web 2.0 and web 3.0 and web 4.0, the profound impact of iWebby and the soon to be termed iWebby 2.0 will change everything, and give birth to new horizons. Free of the traditional burdens of function, specifics, and meaning, iWebby should grow unfettered and furious to take over the Internet."
A.K.A. "I'm too stupid to tie my own shoes (a technical problem I shouldn't have to deal with), and want someone to blame when I eventually trip, or someone to call for 24X7X4 gold customer shoelace support."
Or is that the business 101 where they discuss the 'business model' of the Internet?
Now I know why Venezuela offered cheap oil to Boston - assistance for the mentally challenged. Hugo Chávez has obviously seen downtown Boston, and perhaps even the stop-and-go rotary traps.
I just got back from driving aroung Boston. If the WiFi is done with the same attention to basic common sense as the road (like marking detours all the way through, which they don't), it's sure to fail. A few months ago there was a graphic arts convention in Boston, and literally thousands were stranded at a convention center because of mismarked roads. It looks as though when the city hires planners and other management, they seem to think a three digit IQ means the applicant can count to three.
I wouldn't say that OSX is a much better home for OSS than windows. - it really depends on the application. Neither OSX or windows does distribution management, so integrating an application will be more difficult on OSX and windows that on an OS that supports distribution management.
Could just watch their traffic, and when they try to bid on ebay, just slow their traffic down, then out bid them. They'll rue the day they tried to outbid 'yourneighborfromhell' on ebay.
Now lets see how much they'll pay to all the people whose PCs have been crippled by all the malware kazaa dumps on their computers.
FTFA: We have won another battle in an ongoing war," said John Kennedy, chairman and CEO of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industries (IFPI). "We move forward with a spring in our step."
All they have to do now is get all those undead offenders to pay up.
Know what 'Ad Homonym" means? Its a fundamental logic error in your argument. Just like the one that windows only has viruses because its widespread. Another fundamental logic error. Windows has viruses due in some cases to weak design, and in other cases due to poor implementation, and in other cases due to simple not-so-good admin practices. The first two are MS's responsibility, and the last of course isn't.
Porn servers work about as well overseas as they do here, a significant portion of the time. Not always, but often enough.
As to the constant ridicule of the tubes analogy, it isn't as much about whether or not the tubes analogy accurately describe the "Internet", as the ridiculous context in which the analogy was made. When you read/hear the speech, it becomes clear that the quasi-honorable senator stevens is swapping analogies like a two year old playing with pudding. His point was that any given individual connection anywhere on the internet has limited capacity. He could have just said that, instead of revealing how ignorant he really is.
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
- Abraham Lincoln
It's precisely because it can't be codified globally that it's pointless to do anything about it here.
There are lots of things codified into law here that aren't elsewhere. Even at the local level, its a commonplace thing.
What it means is that if webmasters in another country violated such a law, if it were to pass as such, would be advised not to travel to the US.
Now, as to the question of whether or not misleading tagging of the sort refered to in the legislation were to be affected, well, that's another issue entirely.
I don't think the bush admin or the right wing realize that the terrorists' goal is not to 'defeat us' but to spread confusion, fear, division, and dissarray. Getting us to give up our rights is a victory for them. If the rational for dismissing the lawsuit is that dismissing it denies the enemy even a partial victory or tool or them to use towards a some kind of advantage, such a dismissal does just the opposite. Dismissing the AT&T lawsuit hands one over to the terrorists. In a 'war on terror' where out enemy is not a nation, but an ideology, our only true weapon is how determined we are to adhere to our forefathers' vision of a nation based on the rights of its citizens. Even during an undeclared war.
Any dictator can reign bombs and bullets, but only the truly brave can dare to defend the rights of the people when borders are threatened, and stand by the conviction of the idea that it is the people that are more important, rather than the government. And, if we perish under such a cause, then liberty is a thing too beautiful for the world to grasp, freedom too nobel for humanity to possess. We deserve to fall under the hand of evil, if we can't stand up for what is right.
That explains why so many christians want to ban evolution in public schools, and why christians attack proponents of evolution with various kinds of either ad homonym attacks (such as what you have been doing) or attempts to paint evolution itself as non-scientific (like a big hypocrisy). The problem is that none of the arguments against evolution, ad homonym or otherwise, has any relevant substance. That, by the way, doesn't mean they're wrong or that god doesn't exist - just that they don't contribute anything relevant or useful.
For example, you expand on your personal beliefs as evidence that stances against evolution are perfectly rational, perhaps believing that anti-evolution rhetoric will appear rational as well, and perhaps thinking that various forms of ad homonym attacks will somehow gain legitimacy as well. That doesn't actually work. As soon as you resort to the phrase "you don't know what you're talking about" or something like that, people pretty much smell fear, so to speak.
Another strategy that also lacks relevant substance is that the notion that the idea that god created everything is another scientific explanation, and somehow has a place in science. This is a 'lever' strategy, attempting to gain a credible foothold on scientific ground, in the hopes that the religious point of view will gain credibility similar to the scientific method, and use that credibility to again discredit the theory of evolution. Again this isn't relevant since the theory of evolution is a *scientific* theory, not a religious belief (another irrelevant angle used by religious proponents is that evolution is about as religious as a belief in god, a tack which ignores the scientific method altogether).
All these attempts to bring god into the discussion just aren't relevant to the theory of evolution. God has no place in science, since, as an astronomer friend of mine once said (quoting one of his professors), "science has nothing at all to do with truth". Science is about science and the scientific method. Evolution is a scientific theory regarding how life develops, and yes it postulates that humans evolved from earlier forms of primates. As a scientific theory, it says nothing at all about god. That doesn't mean god has no place in someone's life, just not in a scientific theory.
Besides, if one day the scientific method does reveal the nature of god, what if it turns out the christians had it wrong all along? And the flying spagetti monster did guide the hand of evolution after all? Or what if Krishna did?
Slashdot Mirror
How do we know that these patches aren't part of some sort of government initiative to harvest data?
Because the government isn't that competent or clever. The effective 'intelligence' of any organization is inversely proportional to its size.
claim that Jesus Christ is Lord
lord of what - dogma?
FTP:the city of Hoboken had police escort the Robotic employees from the premises
Isn't it the robots usually escorting the humans from the building...?
Kinda makes me feel like I'm on the Truman show - all famous and special and such.
Oh wait - its a bad thing, not having a life of my own...
pple who cant tyhp shoulndyt be ushing the inpternet anwywya
Perhaps the entire question of religion and its effect on societies could be better rephrased to ask if there's a religious framework out there that has demonstrated the best ability to curb violence and hatred.
"you need to choose to run the console as administrator"
What kinds of privs are in effect then? All access All, or role allowed to do task for object (or something like that)? - Just curious
Until MS figures out that permissions should be based on tasks, roles, and objects instead of who you log in as, all the stupid human tricks inthe world won't help them. It looks to me as though security in vista has the same thinking underpinning its design as NT/2K/XP - log in as admin to do admin things, and have permission to to anything.
I'm going to start using a totally fictitious term that sounds like it might be related to the Internet, like iWebby or something like that, and then see how long before the businessweeks start naming 'players', 'moguls', and 'leaders'.
Talk about form over substance.
I can see it now - "businessweek interview iWebby founder and lead VC. There no money - yet, but like web 2.0 and web 3.0 and web 4.0, the profound impact of iWebby and the soon to be termed iWebby 2.0 will change everything, and give birth to new horizons. Free of the traditional burdens of function, specifics, and meaning, iWebby should grow unfettered and furious to take over the Internet."
Soon followed by the famous iWebby bust.
Did it only erase sermons bashing evolution? Isn't that a virus of sorts?
"Business 101"
A.K.A. "I'm too stupid to tie my own shoes (a technical problem I shouldn't have to deal with), and want someone to blame when I eventually trip, or someone to call for 24X7X4 gold customer shoelace support."
Or is that the business 101 where they discuss the 'business model' of the Internet?
Now I know why Venezuela offered cheap oil to Boston - assistance for the mentally challenged. Hugo Chávez has obviously seen downtown Boston, and perhaps even the stop-and-go rotary traps.
I just got back from driving aroung Boston. If the WiFi is done with the same attention to basic common sense as the road (like marking detours all the way through, which they don't), it's sure to fail. A few months ago there was a graphic arts convention in Boston, and literally thousands were stranded at a convention center because of mismarked roads. It looks as though when the city hires planners and other management, they seem to think a three digit IQ means the applicant can count to three.
Looks like open season on Amazon...
Defend freedom of information from government and corporate influence.
That's what really protects freedom, liberty, democracy, and people's rights. If you're lucky.
I wouldn't say that OSX is a much better home for OSS than windows. - it really depends on the application. Neither OSX or windows does distribution management, so integrating an application will be more difficult on OSX and windows that on an OS that supports distribution management.
Could just watch their traffic, and when they try to bid on ebay, just slow their traffic down, then out bid them. They'll rue the day they tried to outbid 'yourneighborfromhell' on ebay.
Now lets see how much they'll pay to all the people whose PCs have been crippled by all the malware kazaa dumps on their computers.
FTFA: We have won another battle in an ongoing war," said John Kennedy, chairman and CEO of the International Federation of the Phonographic Industries (IFPI). "We move forward with a spring in our step."
All they have to do now is get all those undead offenders to pay up.
"no matter what you Linux geeks here say"
Know what 'Ad Homonym" means? Its a fundamental logic error in your argument. Just like the one that windows only has viruses because its widespread. Another fundamental logic error. Windows has viruses due in some cases to weak design, and in other cases due to poor implementation, and in other cases due to simple not-so-good admin practices. The first two are MS's responsibility, and the last of course isn't.
Porn servers work about as well overseas as they do here, a significant portion of the time. Not always, but often enough.
As to the constant ridicule of the tubes analogy, it isn't as much about whether or not the tubes analogy accurately describe the "Internet", as the ridiculous context in which the analogy was made. When you read/hear the speech, it becomes clear that the quasi-honorable senator stevens is swapping analogies like a two year old playing with pudding. His point was that any given individual connection anywhere on the internet has limited capacity. He could have just said that, instead of revealing how ignorant he really is.
"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
- Abraham Lincoln
It's precisely because it can't be codified globally that it's pointless to do anything about it here.
There are lots of things codified into law here that aren't elsewhere. Even at the local level, its a commonplace thing.
What it means is that if webmasters in another country violated such a law, if it were to pass as such, would be advised not to travel to the US.
Now, as to the question of whether or not misleading tagging of the sort refered to in the legislation were to be affected, well, that's another issue entirely.
I don't think the bush admin or the right wing realize that the terrorists' goal is not to 'defeat us' but to spread confusion, fear, division, and dissarray. Getting us to give up our rights is a victory for them. If the rational for dismissing the lawsuit is that dismissing it denies the enemy even a partial victory or tool or them to use towards a some kind of advantage, such a dismissal does just the opposite. Dismissing the AT&T lawsuit hands one over to the terrorists. In a 'war on terror' where out enemy is not a nation, but an ideology, our only true weapon is how determined we are to adhere to our forefathers' vision of a nation based on the rights of its citizens. Even during an undeclared war.
Any dictator can reign bombs and bullets, but only the truly brave can dare to defend the rights of the people when borders are threatened, and stand by the conviction of the idea that it is the people that are more important, rather than the government. And, if we perish under such a cause, then liberty is a thing too beautiful for the world to grasp, freedom too nobel for humanity to possess. We deserve to fall under the hand of evil, if we can't stand up for what is right.
Makes me wonder if that's how GWB's brain cell works.
Spread calm, spread fear, spread calm, spread fear - oops gotta pee - spread calm, spread fear...
It was posted anonymously...
That explains why so many christians want to ban evolution in public schools, and why christians attack proponents of evolution with various kinds of either ad homonym attacks (such as what you have been doing) or attempts to paint evolution itself as non-scientific (like a big hypocrisy). The problem is that none of the arguments against evolution, ad homonym or otherwise, has any relevant substance. That, by the way, doesn't mean they're wrong or that god doesn't exist - just that they don't contribute anything relevant or useful.
For example, you expand on your personal beliefs as evidence that stances against evolution are perfectly rational, perhaps believing that anti-evolution rhetoric will appear rational as well, and perhaps thinking that various forms of ad homonym attacks will somehow gain legitimacy as well. That doesn't actually work. As soon as you resort to the phrase "you don't know what you're talking about" or something like that, people pretty much smell fear, so to speak.
Another strategy that also lacks relevant substance is that the notion that the idea that god created everything is another scientific explanation, and somehow has a place in science. This is a 'lever' strategy, attempting to gain a credible foothold on scientific ground, in the hopes that the religious point of view will gain credibility similar to the scientific method, and use that credibility to again discredit the theory of evolution. Again this isn't relevant since the theory of evolution is a *scientific* theory, not a religious belief (another irrelevant angle used by religious proponents is that evolution is about as religious as a belief in god, a tack which ignores the scientific method altogether).
All these attempts to bring god into the discussion just aren't relevant to the theory of evolution. God has no place in science, since, as an astronomer friend of mine once said (quoting one of his professors), "science has nothing at all to do with truth". Science is about science and the scientific method. Evolution is a scientific theory regarding how life develops, and yes it postulates that humans evolved from earlier forms of primates. As a scientific theory, it says nothing at all about god. That doesn't mean god has no place in someone's life, just not in a scientific theory.
Besides, if one day the scientific method does reveal the nature of god, what if it turns out the christians had it wrong all along? And the flying spagetti monster did guide the hand of evolution after all? Or what if Krishna did?