I do hate MS for thier practices, and I have a strong aversion to windows, but I fail to see how that can be turned into "I want to screw Microsoft every day"
It's a little philosophy called do unto others as they do to you.
Re:Yes, we expect ADMINS to edit config files.
on
More on KDE Groupware
·
· Score: 2
I wouldn't want to work in a department for a masochist like you.
Using my knowledge to do things the quickest and easiest way currently available is masochistic?!?
You're assuming in all your examples that things will only be done once, or will not require small flags or switches..
All my examples?!? There was one example, and it was yours.
As for someone making a list of users that need to be in a group, true someone does need to make it, so have an import mechanism in the GUI
You're assuming now that either the OS you're working with is Open Source which would allow you to do this, or that the vendor has decided to write this particular functionality into the GUI in just such a way as to allow this to work. That is a big assumption.
what if u want to delete a user ? Then you delete the user. Duh! How you would do this again depends on the particular system in question. Were it me doing it on my personal machine right now for one user, I would probably do it using linuxconf. However it would be completely idiotic to do it this way if I was deleting 300 users which was the example (that you gave, remember). It would be quicker to look up the correct switches for userdel to remove the home directory (or not if this is important) and figure out the proper command to type in to remove these users than it would to do it through any existing GUI user interface that I have ever seen or even heard of. This is, of course, assuming that there are a lot of users you are not deleting, and that there isn't some other common factor, like you want to delete the entire marketing group or something similar.
either way, you'll end up writing scripts to make things easier for you as they get more and more repetitive.
You seem to fail to understand that this is essentially why scripting languages were invented. Any admin too stupid to learn how to use the tools available to save time and effort should not be working in that position because they spend an hour doing something that would take a competent admin (note: not even necessarily a good one) 5 minutes.
I still wouldn't work for you..:).
You got that god damn right. You are absolutely incompetent as an admin. You said that you would rather "run around making sure that the servers are up and running than reading man pages" If you would read the freaking manual, you wouldn't have to run around, and you would have less problems with servers crashing no matter what OS you're running because you would have a clue how the system worked. You must have gotten your/. account when you were 10, or you would have had to have learned something by now.
Now what exactly are we arguing about ? that GUIs or ways to make repetive tasks easier or faster is not necessary ? or that You don't think a GUI is necessry at all and people should just learn all the different utils that come with txtutils ?.
No, you said that a GUI is the best way to do things and gave an example where it was the worst possible way to do it. I ripped your example to shreds. You proceeded to wax poetic about some hypothetical magical GUI that has yet to be invented and how it would solve all of these problems. I said that I wouldn't hire a person like you to do system administration since you would prefer running all over rebooting servers to doing your freaking job, which includes learning how to administer the systems.
You then called me a masochist for wanting to do things the quick, easy, way rather than doing things the masochistic way: Let's see... Smith, Bob....there we go... clickety clack.....Smith, Benny..... there it is.....clickety clack.. Repeat 298 more times.
Oh wait... no, you wanted to use a magic telepathic interface that hasn't been invented.
I want an easy way to administer things, making the list of 300 users will be tedious no matter what, but repetive tasks, etc need to be simplified, and a gui is needed.
Shit in one hand and want in the other and see which fills faster. Again making the list is almost certainly not your job, but once it's made there is an easy way to do it and a hard way right now. The GUI way is the hard way. You have yet to offer anything to counter this except for wishing for something. What I demonstrated to you was a way to simplify a repetitive task. Your bitch about it was, as far as I can tell, that you would have to actually know something about the system you are supposed to be an administrator of.
A GUI is most certainly not always *needed*. In many situations it is useful, and in some it is so close to needed as to make no difference ( I would absolutely freaking *not* want to have to run a CLI version of Photoshop for example). You seem to fail to understand that there is a whole world of people who exist in a state between "elite geek" and complete freaking moron.
The don't grant it to anyone coming to Germany via a safe third country. The United States would be one of thouse safe countries.
Are you certain about this? No European country can legally extradite a suspect to the USA because of capital punishment. Actually, this is probably only true if the suspected crime is serious enough that this might be an issue. Nonetheless, the USA isn't automatically considered a "safe" country. In most of the civilized world we are considered a barbarian nation in the same calss as China, and the "Axis of Evil" with respect to our justice system.
I am still waiting to hear one good reason to run Netscape 7 instead of Mozilla!:-)
Well there's.... no... that's not it. You could... no, I guess you couldn't really. You know about the.... hmmm...not that either.
Well, I hope you enjoy waiting. I think this will be a long one;-)
Re:Yes, we expect ADMINS to edit config files.
on
More on KDE Groupware
·
· Score: 2
I see that you are pretty close minded, you're automatically assuming that the new Admin tool which I said should be like MMC in terms of purpose, will be slow.
Close minded?!? Whatever. I thought that that was what you were referring to. My bad. Now perhaps you would like to offer a suggestion as to how your interface will know which users go into your new group before they are put into a group. You can't really sort them in a way to make it easy to use any existing GUI user manager unless they already have something else in common in which case it's a non issue. Just put that commonality in the group. Done.
Your solution of having a list of users in a file called users.txt does not explain how the users got to that file.. and
Well, you will have a list unless you do everything by telepathy. Someone obviously has to compile the list before they ask you to add a list of people to a group.
I didn't say click 300 times, I said somehow have the ability to select the 300 users, and then say move them all to group marketing, this is the same amount of work needed to put your users in a users.txt file.
Again, it's (almost certainly) not the job of the sysadmin to determine who goes into the marketing group. Someone will supply you with the list you work off of.
Somehow?!? This implies magic. So if you're saying that at some point in time there will be some sort of thingy with a GUI which will make this process easier, then, OK, I can't really argue with a theoretical interface which might be developed at some unspecified point in the future.
It may be easy for you, but I want to spend more time making sure the system is up and running, than reading man pages on awk and sed.
If you don't have time to learn about the system you are trying to keep running, then you will never work in any department that I have any control over. Reading the man pages, or the windows equivalent is what allows you to keep the system running proactively. I'm not sure if this comment was a blatant troll, or if you honestly didn't put any thought into the consequences of your statements.
Bush allowed it to happen? Interesting mix of abject leftism and conspiracy theory.
It is, in fact, neither leftist nor a conspiracy theory. It is something that you would know as well if you could be bothered to take an active role in informing yourself. You, completely ignored the well-documented fact I stated about the deputy director of the FBI. Couple this with the fact that many foreign governments informed our government about the attacks, including names dates and places before hand, and it is perfectly clear that Bush knew about the attacks beforehand. Now, it is a fact and a matter of public record that he knew what was being planned, and that he ordered the FBI to stop investigating the people responsible. Just because CNN or Fox news, or whoever you get your news from doesn't see a way to increase profits by telling you this, doesn't absolve you of your responsibility as a citizen of a democracy to inform yourself.
Hmm, interesting theory you have there. I hardly support everything President Bush does (and I did, in fact, vote for Harry Browne). However, I see little reason to belittle him, even when I do disagree with his policies, and I certainly don't cry sour grapes about the outcome of a political fiasco that neither side deserved to win.
Again, you clearly haven't bothered to inform yourself about what happened. In the first place, Bush lost the election. That is a well documented fact. When they recounted the entire state of Florida, it was determined absolutely, with no doubt whatsoever in the mind of anybody involved with the process. This is not under any dispute by anybody. Now, this did come out after Bush was already sworn in, and far be it from me to argue that Gore wasn't a complete fuckwad about the whole issue. But the fact remains that if Bush had a shred of integrity he would have stepped down when this became public.
This isn't even the important part of the issue though. The important part is that the election would not have even been close enough for this to have mattered if Bush hadn't cheated beforehand. The manner in which it was done shows quite clearly that Bush has nothing but hatred and contempt for everything this country stands for. You do know that Jeb Bush, George's brother is the governor of Florida don't you? You do also know that he had his secretary of state throw about 80,000 citizens of Florida off of the voter rolls don't you? You also know that these people were all registered democrats, and mostly black don't you? You are also aware that they are being sued for this aren't you?
If any of these things are news to you, which they clearly are otherwise you wouldn't have made that post proclaiming your ignorance, then you are ignorant (look it up) of this issue
Now, this is not an ad hominem attack, nor was the "blatant ignorance" comment previously.
If you are a white man and I call you a white man, that is a statement of fact, not an attack on your person. Similarly if I call you left-handed and you are.
So when you demonstrate quite clearly and publicly that you are ignorant of an issue which it is your duty to be informed of, then you are in fact blatantly ignorant of that issue. This isn't an insult. It is a simple statement of fact. Ignorance is a state of mind which you can change. I am ignorant of many things such as the current temperature in Somalia, the price of tea in China, and many other things.
If you would actually do some research, you would no longer be ignorant on these issues, but it seems that you would rather blame me for pointing it out than actually fix the problem.
That, my friend, is the way too prevalent attitude in this country that allows fiascos like this to go on.
.
Re:Yes, we expect ADMINS to edit config files.
on
More on KDE Groupware
·
· Score: 2
Say you have 5000 users, you want to edit something about user 4932, do you really want to open up vi/pico/joe/jed/kate/emacs/nvi/staroff... the list goes on.
Yes, actually, since I would be done and on to something else before MMC even finished loading.
Back to the 5000 user system, say you want to create a group called, marketing,.. and you have 300 people in that group.. do you really want to do this over a text editor ? or could just say.. ctrl select the users, or sort them out in way, and then just drag them into the new group ?.
How is this not 100 times worse? You can't sort and shift click them since they aren't in a group currently. You have to drag and drop 300 times.
Assuming you have a list of users who should go into the new group in a file called users.txt, this takes one line. usermod -G marketing `cat users.txt`
Even if you didn't know how to do this, you could learn how and complete the job quicker than you could through MMC.
If you find text files as an easier solution, then by all means go ahead use those, I don't. And that is why I want an admin tool.
I'm sure there are cases where it actually is easier to use some sort of admin interface, but these are horrible examples, since they go directly against your point.
So, you'd rather have a murderous coward who takes civilian life as a standard operating procedure instead of reasoned debate and diplomacy?
Well, I'm not him, but I would rather have someone who you at least knows where he stands. 9/11 happened because Bush allowed it to happen. That's why the Deputy Director of the FBI resigned in protest *BEFORE* the attacks complaining that Bush *ordered* the FBI to stop investigating the bin Laden family.
So we have a murderous coward in office who is only there because he cheated.
That's quite possibly the most disgusting thing I've ever seen on screen.
What about your blatant ignorance of the most basic facts about the Bush administration.? That's pretty disgusting to see in a citizen of a democracy. If you can't be bothered to inform yourself, then your ignorance affects me too. Please stop it.
I'm a DOI subcontractor, and all our systems are DOI-owned. We have Linux, Unix, Irix, and SunOs all over the place,....This will have little if any effect.
Well, except that we (the taxpayers) will be paying MS every year for licenses for their complete software library for each and every one of those Sun, SGI, Apple etc. machines even though they can't run any of it. Don't forget, that's how MS licensing works.
I vote for who I believe is the best person running. The person I voted for in the last election wasn't even close by any way of counting.
The person who was legally elected president was not allowed to take the office after the last election. That was my point. Saying, "if you don't like it vote to change it", is no longer a valid option since you can vote all you want and it won't help at all any more.
No, it isn't. I don't think this means what you think it means.
That simply is not a rational argument. It *is* perfectly rational to reply, though you don't want to seem to agree, that neither can a newborn exist without care.
It is in fact a perfectly rational argument. Your response, like the previous one tries to ignore the point I brought up in favor of a point I refuted in my original post. Existing without care is not the issue. Being unable to exist outside of the body of the mother period regardless of any care or any thing else whatsoever are fundamentally different concepts.
At what point, then, does life begin in your view? It seems you are chosing to ignore this fundamental question.
I would say it's not even worth discussing something as a life until it can exist as its own entity. It is irrelevant that it needs to be taken care of, fed, etc. It is still its own life within its own body. A 2 week old embryo can not exist outside of its host body. This is quite clearly not "a life" as we use this term in daily speech.
A rational argument should be made devoid of emotion, using logic and reason. I suggest you cannot point out any reason why my arguments have been irrational, other than that I don't agree with you.
Logic and reason would dictate you actually read the whole argument to which you are replying. You quite obviously failed to do this *twice*. It has nothing to do with what your point is, or whether I agree with it. It has to do with the fact that I already shot down that response while I was making my argument. Here is the third time. Perhaps you will actually read it this time which will allow you the possibility of constructing a rational argument.
"I'm not saying can it get a job and buy food down at the grocery store."
See that? It has nothing to do with a baby's ability to feed itself once it is born. The issue is the ability to survive *outside the body of another human being*
Your ad hominem attacks do you a disservice.
It was not an ad hominem attack. It was my opinion backed up by arguments you completely ignore.
Please stick to the topic at hand.
The topic at hand is stem cell research. Everything after the first paragraph of my original post is off the topic at hand. You seem to be picking and choosing little bits of what I am saying to respond to while ignoring the fundamental issues which would require you to actually think about your assumptions, which most people never do, were you to actually address them.
I have not at any point suggested that having sex is a crime. I have presented a rational case that if a couple engages in sex, and it results in a new life, the preservation of life supersedes all other rights. They should be bound (by law, in my opinion) to look after the welfare of that life.
Well, if you are punished for an action by law, then that looks a lot like a crime. If someone chooses to actually bring a child into the world, then sure they should take care of it. If they don't choose to do that, then a sane person would want to give them every option to not do so. This is why I find people who want to outlaw abortion to be so disgusting. In the name of saving a life, they are potentially ruining many lives. This is not a rational trade off. Even if it was, it's none of your freaking business to tell other people what to do inside of their own bodies. Period. If you think it is, then you are completely insane.
Certainly a reasonable solution is adoption. Now, if they don't want to be bound to look after the welfare of a child they might conceive, then they both have sure-fire alternatives available to them to prevent conception of any new life.
Adoption is not really a good solution either. Sure, it can work but in a lot of cases, adopted children grow up feeling worthless and inadequate. Not in all cases, and I won't even go as far as most, since I have no statistics on this, but I do know that there are many cases where this is true. Also, there are too many people in this world as is. People who choose not to have children generally are making a well thought out choice. Most people who have children put no thought into it at all. They think that's what they're supposed to do, so they do it. No thought is given as to whether it would be better for the potential child's welfare to not be born in the first place.
I'm glad to find we agree on something, but the fundamental question remains, when is it a child?
Well, then I'm glad this fundamental question has been clearly settled. If it must remain inside a host body to survive then it is obviously *not* a human life. Without being completely serious, something that can't exist outside a host body is known as a parasite.
Can a two week old infant exist on its own without its mother's care? Not likely. Is it a human being? Is it wrong to kill it? Is that a "rational" enough refutation of your "point"?
That is a completely pathetic and irrational attempt to refute the point. I was very careful in my wording on this point as evidenced by, "I'm not saying can it get a job and buy food down at the grocery store."
Maybe you should think these things through for a few seconds before you start deciding who's the "disgusting, sub-human scum".
Obviously I did think it through quite well since I managed to counter your point before you even made it.
The disgusting sub-human bit was directed at a different issue than this one though. That was directed at those who would make laws to cause one mistake to destroy multiple lives when it is completely unnecessary.
The processor is more than twice the speed of the other processor, but the computer as a whole is nowhere near this much faster.
I have no clue what the percentages are on a machine like this, but I remember hearing back in the day (66 MHz bus days or so) that a 50% processor speed up would only give you like 10% overall improvement given "normal" usage. The greater the jump in proc speed, the greater the number of bottlenecks that can occur.
The argument that an embryo is not human life has always seemed very "hand-wavey" to me, with heavy use of scientific terminology that can't do justice to the profound question of l-i-f-e.
OK, here is an explanation so simple you should have no problems following it.
Can an embryo exist on its own outside of its host body? I'm not saying can it get a job and buy food down at the grocery store. I'm asking is it capable of surviving without being inside the body of its mother?
No, of course it can't. Then it is *not* in any way shape or form an *individual* life.
Of course, you will not accept this, yet you will be completely unable to come up with *rational* refutation of my point.
Abortion and similar opponents are, in general, (no offense to you personally) about the most disgusting sub-human scum on the planet.
Again, look at it rationally. Their motives might be good, although I personally doubt it in most cases, but their actions make the situation far worse than it would have been if they stuck to their own freaking business rather than trying to tell everybody else how to run their lives.
In the first place, most of the anti-abortion people are the same ones who are up in arms whenever anyone talks about teaching people about birth control. Yes, I know these are not the same exact sets of people, but the overlap is huge. So, in part, they helped create the situation where the issue of an abortion is even addressed.
Then look at what they are actually saying. They claim to be defending some unborn life. So rather than allow a person to choose what she allows to grow inside her own freaking body, they want to force her by law to go through 9 months of pregnancy, and then 18 years of raising a child she either did not want, or can not afford. Neither of these situations are good ones in which to raise a child, so it's bad for the child they claim to be helping.
Very seriously, these people are claiming that having sex is a crime that should be punished by a worse penalty than any other crime there is.
If you want kids, and choose to have them, then that is totally your business, and I'm sure it can be a rewarding experience. Imagine being forced at gunpoint to not only have one, but spend the next 18 years of your life raising it. Of course if you screw up badly at this job *THAT YOU DIDN'T EVEN WANT IN THE FIRST PLACE* then you can get sent to jail for that anyway. This not only affects you, but an actual real child not just a couple of cells as would be affected if the person had been allowed to exercise one of the most fundamental rights of a human being: the right to NOT reproduce.
To any person of sound mind, this is absolutely insane.
I still remember running the numbers to see if we could fit 4 12inch subs in my friends nissan 240sx
Could, or should?
I saw a picture in car audio magazine one time of a honda accord (old style) that had somewhere around 30 18" woofers in the back. He just had 4 or 5 big sheets of plywood with as many woofers as he could fit screwed in to it. no boxes, and the back of the car wasn't even sealed. It must have sounded like complete crap, but it was possible to fit them.
In the future should the terms of the contract come into question they could verify that the contract each held was in fact the original by realigning them along the tear;
So say you and I enter such a contract where you agree to give me $5.00 right now, and I agree to give you a pile of grain in a week. A week later , you bring your half of the contract to collect, and I say, "match what? You must be smoking crack"
Dude, that is flagrantly insulting to our hockey playing friends up north.
They are obviously advanced enough to have learned that you can *not* have indoor plumbing in an igloo. The splatter alone would eventually melt through the wall of the igloo rendering it useless.
Please try to have a little common courtesy, and use some common sense. It'll make the world a better place if all the different peoples can learn a little about each other, and show some respect.
I don't think I've ever seen a post like this where the poster didn't mention the model of their laptop.
Now while there are a lot of flamers on this site, you're obviously not worried about them. But there are also a lot of very knowledgable people here with a huge variety of hardware.
It's possible that all of your problems are easily fixed, if you know what to do.
So, what kind of laptop and we'll see if we can help.
Slashdot Mirror
Watch for spaces in the URLs.
Rather than add this stupid disclaimer, why not just make them links so this doesn't happen?
As pointed out by my wife, you forgot:
37 to ask what the hell you want with a lightbulb when a match works perfectly well.
I do hate MS for thier practices, and I have a strong aversion to windows, but I fail to see how that can be turned into "I want to screw Microsoft every day"
It's a little philosophy called do unto others as they do to you.
I wouldn't want to work in a department for a masochist like you.
:).
/. account when you were 10, or you would have had to have learned something by now.
Using my knowledge to do things the quickest and easiest way currently available is masochistic?!?
You're assuming in all your examples that things will only be done once, or will not require small flags or switches..
All my examples?!? There was one example, and it was yours.
As for someone making a list of users that need to be in a group, true someone does need to make it, so have an import mechanism in the GUI
You're assuming now that either the OS you're working with is Open Source which would allow you to do this, or that the vendor has decided to write this particular functionality into the GUI in just such a way as to allow this to work. That is a big assumption.
what if u want to delete a user ?
Then you delete the user. Duh!
How you would do this again depends on the particular system in question. Were it me doing it on my personal machine right now for one user, I would probably do it using linuxconf. However it would be completely idiotic to do it this way if I was deleting 300 users which was the example (that you gave, remember). It would be quicker to look up the correct switches for userdel to remove the home directory (or not if this is important) and figure out the proper command to type in to remove these users than it would to do it through any existing GUI user interface that I have ever seen or even heard of. This is, of course, assuming that there are a lot of users you are not deleting, and that there isn't some other common factor, like you want to delete the entire marketing group or something similar.
either way, you'll end up writing scripts to make things easier for you as they get more and more repetitive.
You seem to fail to understand that this is essentially why scripting languages were invented.
Any admin too stupid to learn how to use the tools available to save time and effort should not be working in that position because they spend an hour doing something that would take a competent admin (note: not even necessarily a good one) 5 minutes.
I still wouldn't work for you..
You got that god damn right. You are absolutely incompetent as an admin. You said that you would rather "run around making sure that the servers are up and running than reading man pages" If you would read the freaking manual, you wouldn't have to run around, and you would have less problems with servers crashing no matter what OS you're running because you would have a clue how the system worked. You must have gotten your
Now what exactly are we arguing about ? that GUIs or ways to make repetive tasks easier or faster is not necessary ? or that You don't think a GUI is necessry at all and people should just learn all the different utils that come with txtutils ?.
No, you said that a GUI is the best way to do things and gave an example where it was the worst possible way to do it. I ripped your example to shreds. You proceeded to wax poetic about some hypothetical magical GUI that has yet to be invented and how it would solve all of these problems. I said that I wouldn't hire a person like you to do system administration since you would prefer running all over rebooting servers to doing your freaking job, which includes learning how to administer the systems.
You then called me a masochist for wanting to do things the quick, easy, way rather than doing things the masochistic way: Let's see... Smith, Bob....there we go... clickety clack.....Smith, Benny..... there it is.....clickety clack..
Repeat 298 more times.
Oh wait... no, you wanted to use a magic telepathic interface that hasn't been invented.
I want an easy way to administer things, making the list of 300 users will be tedious no matter what, but repetive tasks, etc need to be simplified, and a gui is needed.
Shit in one hand and want in the other and see which fills faster.
Again making the list is almost certainly not your job, but once it's made there is an easy way to do it and a hard way right now. The GUI way is the hard way. You have yet to offer anything to counter this except for wishing for something.
What I demonstrated to you was a way to simplify a repetitive task. Your bitch about it was, as far as I can tell, that you would have to actually know something about the system you are supposed to be an administrator of.
A GUI is most certainly not always *needed*. In many situations it is useful, and in some it is so close to needed as to make no difference ( I would absolutely freaking *not* want to have to run a CLI version of Photoshop for example). You seem to fail to understand that there is a whole world of people who exist in a state between "elite geek" and complete freaking moron.
I always thought this line was ...dysfunctional insular matresses.
Matress as in a very impolite term for a certain type of woman.
Any backup for this one?
The don't grant it to anyone coming to Germany via a safe third country. The United States would be one of thouse safe countries.
Are you certain about this? No European country can legally extradite a suspect to the USA because of capital punishment. Actually, this is probably only true if the suspected crime is serious enough that this might be an issue.
Nonetheless, the USA isn't automatically considered a "safe" country. In most of the civilized world we are considered a barbarian nation in the same calss as China, and the "Axis of Evil" with respect to our justice system.
I am still waiting to hear one good reason to run Netscape 7 instead of Mozilla! :-)
.... no... that's not it.
;-)
Well there's
You could... no, I guess you couldn't really.
You know about the.... hmmm...not that either.
Well, I hope you enjoy waiting. I think this will be a long one
I see that you are pretty close minded, you're automatically assuming that the new Admin tool which I said should be like MMC in terms of purpose, will be slow.
Close minded?!? Whatever.
I thought that that was what you were referring to. My bad. Now perhaps you would like to offer a suggestion as to how your interface will know which users go into your new group before they are put into a group. You can't really sort them in a way to make it easy to use any existing GUI user manager unless they already have something else in common in which case it's a non issue. Just put that commonality in the group. Done.
Your solution of having a list of users in a file called users.txt does not explain how the users got to that file.. and
Well, you will have a list unless you do everything by telepathy. Someone obviously has to compile the list before they ask you to add a list of people to a group.
I didn't say click 300 times, I said somehow have the ability to select the 300 users, and then say move them all to group marketing, this is the same amount of work needed to put your users in a users.txt file.
Again, it's (almost certainly) not the job of the sysadmin to determine who goes into the marketing group. Someone will supply you with the list you work off of.
Somehow?!? This implies magic. So if you're saying that at some point in time there will be some sort of thingy with a GUI which will make this process easier, then, OK, I can't really argue with a theoretical interface which might be developed at some unspecified point in the future.
It may be easy for you, but I want to spend more time making sure the system is up and running, than reading man pages on awk and sed.
If you don't have time to learn about the system you are trying to keep running, then you will never work in any department that I have any control over. Reading the man pages, or the windows equivalent is what allows you to keep the system running proactively. I'm not sure if this comment was a blatant troll, or if you honestly didn't put any thought into the consequences of your statements.
Bush allowed it to happen? Interesting mix of abject leftism and conspiracy theory.
It is, in fact, neither leftist nor a conspiracy theory.
It is something that you would know as well if you could be bothered to take an active role in informing yourself. You, completely ignored the well-documented fact I stated about the deputy director of the FBI. Couple this with the fact that many foreign governments informed our government about the attacks, including names dates and places before hand, and it is perfectly clear that Bush knew about the attacks beforehand.
Now, it is a fact and a matter of public record that he knew what was being planned, and that he ordered the FBI to stop investigating the people responsible.
Just because CNN or Fox news, or whoever you get your news from doesn't see a way to increase profits by telling you this, doesn't absolve you of your responsibility as a citizen of a democracy to inform yourself.
Hmm, interesting theory you have there. I hardly support everything President Bush does (and I did, in fact, vote for Harry Browne). However, I see little reason to belittle him, even when I do disagree with his policies, and I certainly don't cry sour grapes about the outcome of a political fiasco that neither side deserved to win.
Again, you clearly haven't bothered to inform yourself about what happened.
In the first place, Bush lost the election. That is a well documented fact. When they recounted the entire state of Florida, it was determined absolutely, with no doubt whatsoever in the mind of anybody involved with the process. This is not under any dispute by anybody.
Now, this did come out after Bush was already sworn in, and far be it from me to argue that Gore wasn't a complete fuckwad about the whole issue.
But the fact remains that if Bush had a shred of integrity he would have stepped down when this became public.
This isn't even the important part of the issue though. The important part is that the election would not have even been close enough for this to have mattered if Bush hadn't cheated beforehand.
The manner in which it was done shows quite clearly that Bush has nothing but hatred and contempt for everything this country stands for.
You do know that Jeb Bush, George's brother is the governor of Florida don't you? You do also know that he had his secretary of state throw about 80,000 citizens of Florida off of the voter rolls don't you? You also know that these people were all registered democrats, and mostly black don't you? You are also aware that they are being sued for this aren't you?
If any of these things are news to you, which they clearly are otherwise you wouldn't have made that post proclaiming your ignorance, then you are ignorant (look it up) of this issue
Now, this is not an ad hominem attack, nor was the "blatant ignorance" comment previously.
If you are a white man and I call you a white man, that is a statement of fact, not an attack on your person.
Similarly if I call you left-handed and you are.
So when you demonstrate quite clearly and publicly that you are ignorant of an issue which it is your duty to be informed of, then you are in fact blatantly ignorant of that issue.
This isn't an insult. It is a simple statement of fact. Ignorance is a state of mind which you can change. I am ignorant of many things such as the current temperature in Somalia, the price of tea in China, and many other things.
If you would actually do some research, you would no longer be ignorant on these issues, but it seems that you would rather blame me for pointing it out than actually fix the problem.
That, my friend, is the way too prevalent attitude in this country that allows fiascos like this to go on.
.
Say you have 5000 users, you want to edit something about user 4932, do you really want to open up vi/pico/joe/jed/kate/emacs/nvi/staroff... the list goes on.
.. and you have 300 people in that group.. do you really want to do this over a text editor ? or could just say.. ctrl select the users, or sort them out in way, and then just drag them into the new group ?.
Yes, actually, since I would be done and on to something else before MMC even finished loading.
Back to the 5000 user system, say you want to create a group called, marketing,
How is this not 100 times worse?
You can't sort and shift click them since they aren't in a group currently.
You have to drag and drop 300 times.
Assuming you have a list of users who should go into the new group in a file called users.txt, this takes one line.
usermod -G marketing `cat users.txt`
Even if you didn't know how to do this, you could learn how and complete the job quicker than you could through MMC.
If you find text files as an easier solution, then by all means go ahead use those, I don't. And that is why I want an admin tool.
I'm sure there are cases where it actually is easier to use some sort of admin interface, but these are horrible examples, since they go directly against your point.
So, you'd rather have a murderous coward who takes civilian life as a standard operating procedure instead of reasoned debate and diplomacy?
Well, I'm not him, but I would rather have someone who you at least knows where he stands.
9/11 happened because Bush allowed it to happen.
That's why the Deputy Director of the FBI resigned in protest *BEFORE* the attacks complaining that Bush *ordered* the FBI to stop investigating the bin Laden family.
So we have a murderous coward in office who is only there because he cheated.
That's quite possibly the most disgusting thing I've ever seen on screen.
What about your blatant ignorance of the most basic facts about the Bush administration.? That's pretty disgusting to see in a citizen of a democracy. If you can't be bothered to inform yourself, then your ignorance affects me too. Please stop it.
I'm a DOI subcontractor, and all our systems are DOI-owned. We have Linux, Unix, Irix, and SunOs all over the place, ....This will have little if any effect.
Well, except that we (the taxpayers) will be paying MS every year for licenses for their complete software library for each and every one of those Sun, SGI, Apple etc. machines even though they can't run any of it. Don't forget, that's how MS licensing works.
And be sure to substitute 'A' with 'a' and 'HREF with 'href' since lowercase tags have been established as the standard for some years now.
Fair enough.
I vote for who I believe is the best person running.
The person I voted for in the last election wasn't even close by any way of counting.
The person who was legally elected president was not allowed to take the office after the last election. That was my point.
Saying, "if you don't like it vote to change it", is no longer a valid option since you can vote all you want and it won't help at all any more.
But don't fret. It's your government. You should feel blessed in that you can change it if you want to.
This argument is dead now.
It was once true, but the last election showed absolutely that we can no longer select our own leaders.
Non sequitur.
No, it isn't. I don't think this means what you think it means.
That simply is not a rational argument. It *is* perfectly rational to reply, though you don't want to seem to agree, that neither can a newborn exist without care.
It is in fact a perfectly rational argument. Your response, like the previous one tries to ignore the point I brought up in favor of a point I refuted in my original post. Existing without care is not the issue. Being unable to exist outside of the body of the mother period regardless of any care or any thing else whatsoever are fundamentally different concepts.
At what point, then, does life begin in your view? It seems you are chosing to ignore this fundamental question.
I would say it's not even worth discussing something as a life until it can exist as its own entity. It is irrelevant that it needs to be taken care of, fed, etc. It is still its own life within its own body. A 2 week old embryo can not exist outside of its host body. This is quite clearly not "a life" as we use this term in daily speech.
A rational argument should be made devoid of emotion, using logic and reason. I suggest you cannot point out any reason why my arguments have been irrational, other than that I don't agree with you.
Logic and reason would dictate you actually read the whole argument to which you are replying. You quite obviously failed to do this *twice*.
It has nothing to do with what your point is, or whether I agree with it. It has to do with the fact that I already shot down that response while I was making my argument.
Here is the third time. Perhaps you will actually read it this time which will allow you the possibility of constructing a rational argument.
"I'm not saying can it get a job and buy food down at the grocery store."
See that?
It has nothing to do with a baby's ability to feed itself once it is born. The issue is the ability to survive *outside the body of another human being*
Your ad hominem attacks do you a disservice.
It was not an ad hominem attack. It was my opinion backed up by arguments you completely ignore.
Please stick to the topic at hand.
The topic at hand is stem cell research. Everything after the first paragraph of my original post is off the topic at hand. You seem to be picking and choosing little bits of what I am saying to respond to while ignoring the fundamental issues which would require you to actually think about your assumptions, which most people never do, were you to actually address them.
I have not at any point suggested that having sex is a crime. I have presented a rational case that if a couple engages in sex, and it results in a new life, the preservation of life supersedes all other rights. They should be bound (by law, in my opinion) to look after the welfare of that life.
Well, if you are punished for an action by law, then that looks a lot like a crime.
If someone chooses to actually bring a child into the world, then sure they should take care of it.
If they don't choose to do that, then a sane person would want to give them every option to not do so. This is why I find people who want to outlaw abortion to be so disgusting. In the name of saving a life, they are potentially ruining many lives. This is not a rational trade off.
Even if it was, it's none of your freaking business to tell other people what to do inside of their own bodies. Period. If you think it is, then you are completely insane.
Certainly a reasonable solution is adoption. Now, if they don't want to be bound to look after the welfare of a child they might conceive, then they both have sure-fire alternatives available to them to prevent conception of any new life.
Adoption is not really a good solution either. Sure, it can work but in a lot of cases, adopted children grow up feeling worthless and inadequate.
Not in all cases, and I won't even go as far as most, since I have no statistics on this, but I do know that there are many cases where this is true.
Also, there are too many people in this world as is. People who choose not to have children generally are making a well thought out choice. Most people who have children put no thought into it at all. They think that's what they're supposed to do, so they do it. No thought is given as to whether it would be better for the potential child's welfare to not be born in the first place.
I'm glad to find we agree on something, but the fundamental question remains, when is it a child?
Well, then I'm glad this fundamental question has been clearly settled. If it must remain inside a host body to survive then it is obviously *not* a human life. Without being completely serious, something that can't exist outside a host body is known as a parasite.
Can a two week old infant exist on its own without its mother's care? Not likely. Is it a human being? Is it wrong to kill it?
Is that a "rational" enough refutation of your "point"?
That is a completely pathetic and irrational attempt to refute the point. I was very careful in my wording on this point as evidenced by, "I'm not saying can it get a job and buy food down at the grocery store."
Maybe you should think these things through for a few seconds before you start deciding who's the "disgusting, sub-human scum".
Obviously I did think it through quite well since I managed to counter your point before you even made it.
The disgusting sub-human bit was directed at a different issue than this one though. That was directed at those who would make laws to cause one mistake to destroy multiple lives when it is completely unnecessary.
. Its more than double the speed for $100.
Now, now.
The processor is more than twice the speed of the other processor, but the computer as a whole is nowhere near this much faster.
I have no clue what the percentages are on a machine like this, but I remember hearing back in the day (66 MHz bus days or so) that a 50% processor speed up would only give you like 10% overall improvement given "normal" usage.
The greater the jump in proc speed, the greater the number of bottlenecks that can occur.
The argument that an embryo is not human life has always seemed very "hand-wavey" to me, with heavy use of scientific terminology that can't do justice to the profound question of l-i-f-e.
OK, here is an explanation so simple you should have no problems following it.
Can an embryo exist on its own outside of its host body? I'm not saying can it get a job and buy food down at the grocery store. I'm asking is it capable of surviving without being inside the body of its mother?
No, of course it can't.
Then it is *not* in any way shape or form an *individual* life.
Of course, you will not accept this, yet you will be completely unable to come up with *rational* refutation of my point.
Abortion and similar opponents are, in general, (no offense to you personally) about the most disgusting sub-human scum on the planet.
Again, look at it rationally. Their motives might be good, although I personally doubt it in most cases, but their actions make the situation far worse than it would have been if they stuck to their own freaking business rather than trying to tell everybody else how to run their lives.
In the first place, most of the anti-abortion people are the same ones who are up in arms whenever anyone talks about teaching people about birth control. Yes, I know these are not the same exact sets of people, but the overlap is huge. So, in part, they helped create the situation where the issue of an abortion is even addressed.
Then look at what they are actually saying. They claim to be defending some unborn life. So rather than allow a person to choose what she allows to grow inside her own freaking body, they want to force her by law to go through 9 months of pregnancy, and then 18 years of raising a child she either did not want, or can not afford. Neither of these situations are good ones in which to raise a child, so it's bad for the child they claim to be helping.
Very seriously, these people are claiming that having sex is a crime that should be punished by a worse penalty than any other crime there is.
If you want kids, and choose to have them, then that is totally your business, and I'm sure it can be a rewarding experience. Imagine being forced at gunpoint to not only have one, but spend the next 18 years of your life raising it. Of course if you screw up badly at this job *THAT YOU DIDN'T EVEN WANT IN THE FIRST PLACE* then you can get sent to jail for that anyway.
This not only affects you, but an actual real child not just a couple of cells as would be affected if the person had been allowed to exercise one of the most fundamental rights of a human being: the right to NOT reproduce.
To any person of sound mind, this is absolutely insane.
I still remember running the numbers to see if we could fit 4 12inch subs in my friends nissan 240sx
Could, or should?
I saw a picture in car audio magazine one time of a honda accord (old style) that had somewhere around 30 18" woofers in the back.
He just had 4 or 5 big sheets of plywood with as many woofers as he could fit screwed in to it. no boxes, and the back of the car wasn't even sealed.
It must have sounded like complete crap, but it was possible to fit them.
difficult to reverse, at least on the order of factoring the product of large primes (if not more difficult).
Umm.... there is almost nothing easier than factoring any prime. Large, small, medium, they're all the same: 1 and itself.
In the future should the terms of the contract come into question they could verify that the contract each held was in fact the original by realigning them along the tear;
So say you and I enter such a contract where you agree to give me $5.00 right now, and I agree to give you a pile of grain in a week. A week later , you bring your half of the contract to collect, and I say, "match what? You must be smoking crack"
do they have indoor plumbing in canada ?
Dude, that is flagrantly insulting to our hockey playing friends up north.
They are obviously advanced enough to have learned that you can *not* have indoor plumbing in an igloo.
The splatter alone would eventually melt through the wall of the igloo rendering it useless.
Please try to have a little common courtesy, and use some common sense.
It'll make the world a better place if all the different peoples can learn a little about each other, and show some respect.
This is kind of funny.
I don't think I've ever seen a post like this where the poster didn't mention the model of their laptop.
Now while there are a lot of flamers on this site, you're obviously not worried about them.
But there are also a lot of very knowledgable people here with a huge variety of hardware.
It's possible that all of your problems are easily fixed, if you know what to do.
So, what kind of laptop and we'll see if we can help.
"you eat like a bird". Fuck that, I'm gonna eat again in two hours.
Which is, more or less, how a bird eats.