Googling someone to see if they're a Nazi child molester on the no-fly list is perfectly legal, and as a hiring manager, you can bet I'm going to keep doing it.
And how do you know who is the Nazi child molester? I know hiring managers aren't typically the brightest bulbs but they do know that names aren't unique. Google my name and you get a bunch of stuff none of which has anything to to do with me.
I'm not fan of the tactics of the RIAA, but posts like yours drive me insane. Why do computer geeks seemingly have so much trouble with the concept of "guilty beyond a *reasonable* doubt?" The quote is NOT "guilty beyond all doubt".
Posts like your's drive me insane. Isn't it a civil case? Preponderance of evidence.
But they don't even come close to that. They have a screen shot of an IP address that may be vaguely tied to a particular computer at a given point in time. They present no evidence as to who was using the computer. But their "expert" claims this is unequivocal proof against the named defendant. If your "expert" makes a whole series of patently false claims that kinda diminishes the value of their testimony. Or at least it should.
But fortunately THESE election results were valid, unlike your Mr. Chimp's first election by judge.
So when your guy wins the results are valid.
So I don't feel too sorry for you. In fact, I'm glad the Republicans have become the marginalized party of the deep south, religious fanatics, and wingnuts everywhere.
Jesus. Talk about wingnuts. You win one election and declare the death of the opposition party. Yeah your a standup example of character. I seem to recall the same type statements being made by the Democrats about their own party not too long ago.
Obama so far has supported the worse abuses of the Bush administration. The unconstitutional unrestricted domestic spying done illegally by the last government has so far been fully supported by the current administration. But of course you have such strength of character that you support him anyway since that is more important than democracy.
How such a rabid unreasoned diatribe gets modded insightful...
These two 'analogies' are just plain wrong. The relationship between "climate" and "climate scientists" is "thing" and "experts on thing", and same with "medicine" and "doctors". For these two, however, the relationship is "thing" and "people affected by thing".
How's this then. Computer Science is trivially simple compared to predicting the climate of a planet. Everything on a computer is well defined. It's all simple math on ones and zeros and for a given set of inputs the behavior is well defined. Yet even the best computer scientist's software typically has bugs in it. Yet you expect us to take as gospel the predicted behavior of a system of tremendously greater complexity. Anyone who claims they can predict much less thinks they can know the outcome of corrective actions on a system as complex as a planet has an unbelievable level of conceit.
Listen to yourself. Alternative explanations for climate observations are all testable, and many have been tested. They are NOTHING like creationism or intelligent design, which are anti-scientific nonsense.
And where is this lab you have that exactly models the entire planet where you can definitively test these alternate explanations? At best they make guesses based on the little they understand about the functioning of the planet. In reality the system is so complex and our understanding of it is so limited that accurate scientific analysis is outside the scope of our capabilities.
Is it dogmatic to doubt the conclusions about a system so complex that not only we know that we don't understand all the interactions of the parts we know about but also know there are a great many things about the system that we don't even have a basic understanding of? I'd say it's common sense to question it and anyone who claims to be able to accuratly predict it's functioning. On top of that you expect us to believe conclusions on how to influence that system? I think it's the greatest conceit that anyone could claim with any degree of accuracy to be able to predict long term climatology. The number scientific disciplines involved range into the dozens. Yet people claim enough understanding of all that to model accuratly the functions of such a system. A model only shows what the creators understanding of system is at best.
They didn't just say "Hey I could be wrong", they attempted to quantify the chances of them being wrong. Then they voluntarily report on censor errors that briefly screwed up their data, while I'm sure knowing that this would be blown way out of proportion and used to "prove" that they never know what they're talking about at all. In other words, the opposite of trying to appear like they can't be wrong. So I'm not buying it at all.
I think the big counter argument to this is that those scientist have at there disposal a far more accurate source of information that they choose to ignore because they can't fit it into the long term conclusion that the ice is disappearing due to a lack of long term history . At the very least they should be showing both data sets to allow the more accurate data to cross check and verify the data from the other admittedly less accurate source. This in my mind tends to allow thoughts of bias creep in.
It would be easier to not let her run her computer as an administrator...but I guess that's too close to taking responsibility for your children to be effective.
This gets modded insightful? Ahhh the irony of the Microsoft apologist:
It just works.
But it's full of viruses and malware.
Well you have to reconfigure it and buy all this other software and change it so your not running as Admin and know how to install software when you're not Admin and know what software to install as Admin and know what email attachments are safe and keep it patched and on and on...but it just works.
What gives my ISP the right to start monitoring my packets just because they suspect I'm pirating something?
It's for the children. We must protect the children. Are you one of those evil child porn supporters? If your against this you're a child pornographer.
All you have to do is add this and all politicians will support it and no publication will speak out against it. Haven't you read Mein Kampf?
laws are designed to ensure my labor gets paid, either through wages or through patents.
Go read that line in the constitution about patent and copyright. It doesn't say anywhere that patent and copyright laws are to ensure anyone gets payed for anything. It allows for granting limited time exclusive rights (and the key phrase here) to promote the progress of science and useful arts. Show me the part about where patents and copyright are supposed ensure people are payed for there labor.
does that means credit card fraud isn't stealing? Wicked
Why is this so hard to understand. The distinction is that you now have money that the person you stole it from can no longer use. See. that's stealing. Taking the credit card numbers isn't stealing but using them is. Taking the credit card numbers will get you prosecuted unauthorized access to the system. This is not stealing. Intangible has nothing to do with it.
Someone said it, if that work was allowed to be copied by others without compensation, I in effect, would have done their work for them providing them countless hours of free labor. THAT IS WHY THE CONSTITUTION HAS ARTICLE I SECTION 8!!!
You're the one who needs to go back and read the simple line. For some reason people like you altogether discount the critical part of that line: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts".This is only constitutional reason for patents and copyrights. It has been shown again and again that the patent and, most assuredly, the copyright environment today doesn't serve that purpose and a strong case can be made that it does the opposite. Copyright law currently serves 2 purposes. It has been turned into a welfare system for artists and their descendants and no longer resembles anything focused on promoting the useful arts and it restrains new almost free distribution models so the old entrenched industry can keep the world in the plastic disk age. The patent system is headed down the same road. About the only thing they promote these days is lots of money for lawyers.
You recoup your investment by bringing your invention to market. If you can't do that both you and your invention deserve to fail. Thinking up something is the easy part. getting that something into a useful form and out to market so it is actually serving a purpose is the part that counts. You think you should be able to come up with an idea then sit on your lazy ass and rake in the money from the fruit of other peoples labor in bringing that idea to something useful in the market. You're the one expecting to make money off other peoples work.
Things move much faster today than they did when patent law was first written. It took much longer to bring something to market. Especially in the area of software patents, there is no reason for grants of monopoly.All that does is encourage a stagnant market since no one has innovate to remain viable in the market. Getting to market first gives you the head start to reap the fruits of your labors. From there you need to continue to innovate to stay ahead of competitors. Patents mean no continued innovation because you can sit on your ass and make anyone who extends or innovates pay you. This is the exact opposite of promoting the progress of science.
Microsoft remains popular in part because it is supported by students and faculty, in the sense that IT departments don't have to directly foot the cost of students, faculty and front line staff in other departments (e.g. librarians) providing first response tech support to each other for common Microsoft products. $100-400 for an operating system and software is a small part of the TCO. Free software advocates are free to find ways to also reduce the other parts of TCO with non-MS software, or to conduct lobbying efforts with appropriate incentives etc.
I have to laugh every time I read an explanation like this. It's clearly PHB based. You don't have to pay for front line support from people unqualified to provide it. And you get what you pay for. This adds so much to the TCO in the long run by generating tremendous cost down the road because you have unqualified people fixing problems they don't really understand. You pay $100-$400 for Microsoft products and then 6 or 7 figures in lost productivity every time there's a virus loose on your network. Yeah Windows can be fairly secure when configured and locked down by competent administrators but that never happens because competent administration on top of that $100-$400 makes the TCO shoot through the roof. So they pay Microsoft up front, shirk on administrative cost and pay huge amounts that don't really show up as line items on the old budget. This is Microsoft's business model. It looks cheaper on the budget but is hugely more expensive in productivity terms. Linux/Unix is much easier and cheaper to make secure but you have to pay someone to do it and that shows up on the budget. And once it's set up securely it tends to stay that way unlike Windows which seems to love entropy. On my Linux PCs I do development and install all kinds of complex software to do amazing things. They all have mirrored extensible encrypted drives. Yet they keep humming along for years typically until I upgrade hardware and they get retired. Windows PCs are lucky if they go more than a year with much more limited use before something happens that requires a reinstall.
And I can already hear the arguments "but training...". This is another straw man. It takes no more training to go from XP to Vista than it would to Ubuntu or to Office 2007 vs. OpenOffice.org. Then you'll go into how OpenOffice.org can't run the complex macro based spreadsheets that your business runs off of. Well there are a boatload of free open source software packages that are designed to run every aspect of a business and I guarantee they work much better than any spreadsheet. Having seen some of these spreadsheets I shudder every time I hear that argument. If your business had actually embraced OSS it wouldn't be in that hole of trying to run it off of a bunch of spreadsheets. At some point you need to stop digging.
So Microsoft stays popular because on budget line items it appears cheaper than open source alternatives even though it's TCO is much higher in intangibles that don't appear as budget line items and in terms of productivity.
I've used Linux off and on since 1998, and I've found the hardest part of the install was figuring out which distribution was most appropriate for my needs at the time (well, ease of install is usually the most important factor, but hey that's a need).
So what you're saying is that having a choice is worse than being forced to take whatever Stevy decides he wants you to have. Sorry but I just don't have tat much faith in Microsoft making my decisions for me.
Perhaps it shouldn't actually be a 'criminal offense'. But driving is a privilege not a right, and if you think its ok to get wasted and drive around you should have that privilege revoked.
But driving like an idiot, speeding, flaunting the other traffic laws, that has no intent for causing harm. I hate to tell you this but the vast majority of collisions and deaths in vehicles don't involve anyone who has been drinking. You've been brainwashed by the MADD morons. Driving like an idiot is perfectly ok but driving perfectly with a BAC over.08 should be punishable by death despite the fact that the former is a far greater cause of the carnage on the roads than the later. If people drove responsible while sober, driving while your reaction time is slightly impaired wouldn't be much of an issue.
Fagot ass fanboi. I fucking hate you pieces of shit.
Your ignorance is astounding. You can't even see where another opinion might also have the ability to be valid along side yours. You fucking two dimensional idiot.
No. It means a bunch of drunk drivers will be on the streets free to run whoever they want over. Even if the prosecutors move to blood test, the defendants will require a medical doctor or lab technician to testify as to the nature of the exam and how the test works, and perhaps the manufacturer of the reagents used in the tests have to verify that they are what they are. Tons of money have to be spent by the DA's office, which means higher taxes. Meanwhile, prosecution of drunk driving will go down, and more drunk drivers will be on the streets.
So in your opinion that's more important than actually having to prove you guilty. Hell why use a breathalyser at all. Just go by the surely impartial judgment of the officer. "Yup, he looked drunk." There convicted. Wait, why require proof of any crime. "He looked like a murderer." I'm betting that would reduce murders. So what if some innocents get caught up (unless of course you happen to be one of them).
Sort of like why 'attempted murder' is illegal. So they can legally stop you before you succeed.
That's a stupid argument. Attempted murder you tried to kill someone but failed. Driving with a.08 BAC doesn't mean you're actively trying to cause harm. If fact given the way most people drive and the complete disregard of traffic and driving safety laws it typically is only a minor factor in an accident.
In this situation either you are actually drunk while driving, in which case you are a complete jerk and deserve to be locked up
You know I'm perpetually amazed at the propaganda job pulled off the MADD and associates. It's perfectly alright to drive like an idiot, flaunt the traffics laws and kill someone but if you've had 2 beers and are driving perfectly you should be thrown in jail for life. It's not drunk drivers that are the problem. It's irresponsible drivers whether drunk or sober. People drive like idiots and violate traffic laws with impunity. That's why there is such carnage on our roads. If everyone obeyed traffic laws and drove in a safe responsible manner it would be habit and they would drive that way even after they had a few beers. In the vast majority of drunk driving collisions the primary culprit is not the alcohol but the idiotic, unsafe driving habits of the driver. Start actually enforcing traffic and driving safety laws and you would not only greatly reduce the minority of collisions that are claimed to be caused by someone having a few beers but the majority of collisions that are caused by 100% sober people who drive like idiots.
If you walk up to a cop and he arrests you for DUI, you may have a decent false arrest case on your hands
I don't know. These days you can get a DUI for driving a lawn mower, bicycle, horse or wheel chair and even for not driving your car by sleeping in it while drunk. How long can it be before the MADD morons get sneakers included.
After a day and a half of hold time, call transfers other misc. insanity I'm finally on with the CSR and she apparently has a higher level techie there she's relaying everything from them to me and me to them because HLTs (higher level techies) can't possible communicate with a user. I tell her I can't even ping the DNS servers. She asks what DNS servers I'm using. I tell her and they're correct (had to switch them back from openDNS). So the "HLT" tells her to tell me to try pinging www.somethingoranother.com. I start laughing. She says to HLT: Now he's laughing at me. I explain that if I can't see the Domain Name Server then I'm not going to be able to ping a Domain Name but I'll do it anyway. Took 2 days of crap to get it fixed when I told them what the problem was.
When are these companies going to realize that although people with no technical knowledge are a lot cheaper to higher for tech support it cost them way more in the long run in that a problem that should take 5 minutes to fix ends up taking hours and hours because of cluelessness.
The problem is, as I've been flamed for before, Linux is still nowhere near the point where a non-techie will consider adopting it. Although it's much better than it was even a few years ago, it's still not an idiot-friendly OS where things 'just work', compared to what people are used to.
You've been flamed before because this is just wrong on so many levels it just demonstrates your complete lack of knowledge.
First and foremost Windows does not now and never has "just worked". And it is far less idiot-friendly than the alternatives including Ubuntu. The problem with Windows is that it doesn't even take an idiot to screw it up. Normal use is almost guaranteed to render it useless within a year. That is unless you know how to install and pay for anti-virus software, anti-adware software, install an alternative browser, know what e-mail attachments are safe and which aren't, etc, etc... Yeah, that's surely idiot proof and just works. I could write a book on on cases of Windows just NOT working.
It doesn't take a techie to know that Open Office is a perfect replacement for Microsoft Office. The Verizon thing has nothing to do with Windows just working. Actually Ubuntu would likely just work with her internet connection without having to use the Verizon CD. It most likely has to do with her sticking the CD in and not being able to install the not needed Verizon software and calling Verizon and Verizon telling her that they don't support Linux (had a similar experience with a locked down Windows computer).
I get that all the time when I call for support on internet issues. I tell them I don't want them to support Linux. I want them to fix their damn network. The problem is that these companies hire people who have 0 technical knowledge to do support and doing so costs them boatloads of money in the long run. Example: my neighbor has 2 daughters with laptops. They had several things repaired on both laptops. After they were return neither could connect to the Verizon provided wireless network. The repair rep spent several hours and failed. They spent hours (he said at least 3 hours) on the phone with a Verizon tech who even got them to give him remote desktop control of the computers (wired connection). It took me about a half hour to get both working and most of that was rebooting several times to ensure they would keep working. Did I mention that these were both Windows PC's that should 'just work'? So I guess the techies in this case were just super idiots that even Windows can't protect against?
This is just a recent example. I have a long list of these and I avoid touching Windows. I use it for gaming alone because that's about all it's really good for and only because, again, no one will make their games for Linux. It isn't that Windows just works it's that if you mention Linux everyone states that they won't work with it even though anyone with even half ass technical knowledge who has had to work with both knows that Linux just works far better than any version of Windows.
Slashdot Mirror
Googling someone to see if they're a Nazi child molester on the no-fly list is perfectly legal, and as a hiring manager, you can bet I'm going to keep doing it.
And how do you know who is the Nazi child molester? I know hiring managers aren't typically the brightest bulbs but they do know that names aren't unique. Google my name and you get a bunch of stuff none of which has anything to to do with me.
I'm not fan of the tactics of the RIAA, but posts like yours drive me insane. Why do computer geeks seemingly have so much trouble with the concept of "guilty beyond a *reasonable* doubt?" The quote is NOT "guilty beyond all doubt".
Posts like your's drive me insane. Isn't it a civil case? Preponderance of evidence.
But they don't even come close to that. They have a screen shot of an IP address that may be vaguely tied to a particular computer at a given point in time. They present no evidence as to who was using the computer. But their "expert" claims this is unequivocal proof against the named defendant. If your "expert" makes a whole series of patently false claims that kinda diminishes the value of their testimony. Or at least it should.
But fortunately THESE election results were valid, unlike your Mr. Chimp's first election by judge.
So when your guy wins the results are valid.
So I don't feel too sorry for you. In fact, I'm glad the Republicans have become the marginalized party of the deep south, religious fanatics, and wingnuts everywhere.
Jesus. Talk about wingnuts. You win one election and declare the death of the opposition party. Yeah your a standup example of character. I seem to recall the same type statements being made by the Democrats about their own party not too long ago.
Obama so far has supported the worse abuses of the Bush administration. The unconstitutional unrestricted domestic spying done illegally by the last government has so far been fully supported by the current administration. But of course you have such strength of character that you support him anyway since that is more important than democracy.
How such a rabid unreasoned diatribe gets modded insightful...
So...wait...does this mean that last year was the year of the Linux desktop?
These two 'analogies' are just plain wrong. The relationship between "climate" and "climate scientists" is "thing" and "experts on thing", and same with "medicine" and "doctors". For these two, however, the relationship is "thing" and "people affected by thing".
How's this then. Computer Science is trivially simple compared to predicting the climate of a planet. Everything on a computer is well defined. It's all simple math on ones and zeros and for a given set of inputs the behavior is well defined. Yet even the best computer scientist's software typically has bugs in it. Yet you expect us to take as gospel the predicted behavior of a system of tremendously greater complexity. Anyone who claims they can predict much less thinks they can know the outcome of corrective actions on a system as complex as a planet has an unbelievable level of conceit.
Listen to yourself. Alternative explanations for climate observations are all testable, and many have been tested. They are NOTHING like creationism or intelligent design, which are anti-scientific nonsense.
And where is this lab you have that exactly models the entire planet where you can definitively test these alternate explanations? At best they make guesses based on the little they understand about the functioning of the planet. In reality the system is so complex and our understanding of it is so limited that accurate scientific analysis is outside the scope of our capabilities.
It is the deniers that are being dogmatic.
Is it dogmatic to doubt the conclusions about a system so complex that not only we know that we don't understand all the interactions of the parts we know about but also know there are a great many things about the system that we don't even have a basic understanding of? I'd say it's common sense to question it and anyone who claims to be able to accuratly predict it's functioning. On top of that you expect us to believe conclusions on how to influence that system? I think it's the greatest conceit that anyone could claim with any degree of accuracy to be able to predict long term climatology. The number scientific disciplines involved range into the dozens. Yet people claim enough understanding of all that to model accuratly the functions of such a system. A model only shows what the creators understanding of system is at best.
They didn't just say "Hey I could be wrong", they attempted to quantify the chances of them being wrong. Then they voluntarily report on censor errors that briefly screwed up their data, while I'm sure knowing that this would be blown way out of proportion and used to "prove" that they never know what they're talking about at all. In other words, the opposite of trying to appear like they can't be wrong. So I'm not buying it at all.
I think the big counter argument to this is that those scientist have at there disposal a far more accurate source of information that they choose to ignore because they can't fit it into the long term conclusion that the ice is disappearing due to a lack of long term history . At the very least they should be showing both data sets to allow the more accurate data to cross check and verify the data from the other admittedly less accurate source. This in my mind tends to allow thoughts of bias creep in.
It would be easier to not let her run her computer as an administrator...but I guess that's too close to taking responsibility for your children to be effective.
This gets modded insightful? Ahhh the irony of the Microsoft apologist:
It just works.
But it's full of viruses and malware.
Well you have to reconfigure it and buy all this other software and change it so your not running as Admin and know how to install software when you're not Admin and know what software to install as Admin and know what email attachments are safe and keep it patched and on and on...but it just works.
What gives my ISP the right to start monitoring my packets just because they suspect I'm pirating something?
It's for the children. We must protect the children. Are you one of those evil child porn supporters? If your against this you're a child pornographer.
All you have to do is add this and all politicians will support it and no publication will speak out against it. Haven't you read Mein Kampf?
laws are designed to ensure my labor gets paid, either through wages or through patents.
Go read that line in the constitution about patent and copyright. It doesn't say anywhere that patent and copyright laws are to ensure anyone gets payed for anything. It allows for granting limited time exclusive rights (and the key phrase here) to promote the progress of science and useful arts. Show me the part about where patents and copyright are supposed ensure people are payed for there labor.
does that means credit card fraud isn't stealing? Wicked
Why is this so hard to understand. The distinction is that you now have money that the person you stole it from can no longer use. See. that's stealing. Taking the credit card numbers isn't stealing but using them is. Taking the credit card numbers will get you prosecuted unauthorized access to the system. This is not stealing. Intangible has nothing to do with it.
Someone said it, if that work was allowed to be copied by others without compensation, I in effect, would have done their work for them providing them countless hours of free labor. THAT IS WHY THE CONSTITUTION HAS ARTICLE I SECTION 8!!!
You're the one who needs to go back and read the simple line. For some reason people like you altogether discount the critical part of that line: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts".This is only constitutional reason for patents and copyrights. It has been shown again and again that the patent and, most assuredly, the copyright environment today doesn't serve that purpose and a strong case can be made that it does the opposite. Copyright law currently serves 2 purposes. It has been turned into a welfare system for artists and their descendants and no longer resembles anything focused on promoting the useful arts and it restrains new almost free distribution models so the old entrenched industry can keep the world in the plastic disk age. The patent system is headed down the same road. About the only thing they promote these days is lots of money for lawyers.
You recoup your investment by bringing your invention to market. If you can't do that both you and your invention deserve to fail. Thinking up something is the easy part. getting that something into a useful form and out to market so it is actually serving a purpose is the part that counts. You think you should be able to come up with an idea then sit on your lazy ass and rake in the money from the fruit of other peoples labor in bringing that idea to something useful in the market. You're the one expecting to make money off other peoples work.
Things move much faster today than they did when patent law was first written. It took much longer to bring something to market. Especially in the area of software patents, there is no reason for grants of monopoly.All that does is encourage a stagnant market since no one has innovate to remain viable in the market. Getting to market first gives you the head start to reap the fruits of your labors. From there you need to continue to innovate to stay ahead of competitors. Patents mean no continued innovation because you can sit on your ass and make anyone who extends or innovates pay you. This is the exact opposite of promoting the progress of science.
Microsoft remains popular in part because it is supported by students and faculty, in the sense that IT departments don't have to directly foot the cost of students, faculty and front line staff in other departments (e.g. librarians) providing first response tech support to each other for common Microsoft products. $100-400 for an operating system and software is a small part of the TCO. Free software advocates are free to find ways to also reduce the other parts of TCO with non-MS software, or to conduct lobbying efforts with appropriate incentives etc.
I have to laugh every time I read an explanation like this. It's clearly PHB based. You don't have to pay for front line support from people unqualified to provide it. And you get what you pay for. This adds so much to the TCO in the long run by generating tremendous cost down the road because you have unqualified people fixing problems they don't really understand. You pay $100-$400 for Microsoft products and then 6 or 7 figures in lost productivity every time there's a virus loose on your network. Yeah Windows can be fairly secure when configured and locked down by competent administrators but that never happens because competent administration on top of that $100-$400 makes the TCO shoot through the roof. So they pay Microsoft up front, shirk on administrative cost and pay huge amounts that don't really show up as line items on the old budget. This is Microsoft's business model. It looks cheaper on the budget but is hugely more expensive in productivity terms. Linux/Unix is much easier and cheaper to make secure but you have to pay someone to do it and that shows up on the budget. And once it's set up securely it tends to stay that way unlike Windows which seems to love entropy. On my Linux PCs I do development and install all kinds of complex software to do amazing things. They all have mirrored extensible encrypted drives. Yet they keep humming along for years typically until I upgrade hardware and they get retired. Windows PCs are lucky if they go more than a year with much more limited use before something happens that requires a reinstall.
And I can already hear the arguments "but training...". This is another straw man. It takes no more training to go from XP to Vista than it would to Ubuntu or to Office 2007 vs. OpenOffice.org. Then you'll go into how OpenOffice.org can't run the complex macro based spreadsheets that your business runs off of. Well there are a boatload of free open source software packages that are designed to run every aspect of a business and I guarantee they work much better than any spreadsheet. Having seen some of these spreadsheets I shudder every time I hear that argument. If your business had actually embraced OSS it wouldn't be in that hole of trying to run it off of a bunch of spreadsheets. At some point you need to stop digging.
So Microsoft stays popular because on budget line items it appears cheaper than open source alternatives even though it's TCO is much higher in intangibles that don't appear as budget line items and in terms of productivity.
Is it false? Prove it!
And just how do prove that it's false?
I've used Linux off and on since 1998, and I've found the hardest part of the install was figuring out which distribution was most appropriate for my needs at the time (well, ease of install is usually the most important factor, but hey that's a need).
So what you're saying is that having a choice is worse than being forced to take whatever Stevy decides he wants you to have. Sorry but I just don't have tat much faith in Microsoft making my decisions for me.
My question would be why the hell were they looking through what was on the kids phone in the first place.
Perhaps it shouldn't actually be a 'criminal offense'. But driving is a privilege not a right, and if you think its ok to get wasted and drive around you should have that privilege revoked.
But driving like an idiot, speeding, flaunting the other traffic laws, that has no intent for causing harm. I hate to tell you this but the vast majority of collisions and deaths in vehicles don't involve anyone who has been drinking. You've been brainwashed by the MADD morons. Driving like an idiot is perfectly ok but driving perfectly with a BAC over .08 should be punishable by death despite the fact that the former is a far greater cause of the carnage on the roads than the later. If people drove responsible while sober, driving while your reaction time is slightly impaired wouldn't be much of an issue.
Fagot ass fanboi. I fucking hate you pieces of shit. Your ignorance is astounding. You can't even see where another opinion might also have the ability to be valid along side yours. You fucking two dimensional idiot.
Steve? Is that you?
No. It means a bunch of drunk drivers will be on the streets free to run whoever they want over. Even if the prosecutors move to blood test, the defendants will require a medical doctor or lab technician to testify as to the nature of the exam and how the test works, and perhaps the manufacturer of the reagents used in the tests have to verify that they are what they are. Tons of money have to be spent by the DA's office, which means higher taxes. Meanwhile, prosecution of drunk driving will go down, and more drunk drivers will be on the streets.
So in your opinion that's more important than actually having to prove you guilty. Hell why use a breathalyser at all. Just go by the surely impartial judgment of the officer. "Yup, he looked drunk." There convicted. Wait, why require proof of any crime. "He looked like a murderer." I'm betting that would reduce murders. So what if some innocents get caught up (unless of course you happen to be one of them).
Sort of like why 'attempted murder' is illegal. So they can legally stop you before you succeed.
That's a stupid argument. Attempted murder you tried to kill someone but failed. Driving with a .08 BAC doesn't mean you're actively trying to cause harm. If fact given the way most people drive and the complete disregard of traffic and driving safety laws it typically is only a minor factor in an accident.
In this situation either you are actually drunk while driving, in which case you are a complete jerk and deserve to be locked up
You know I'm perpetually amazed at the propaganda job pulled off the MADD and associates. It's perfectly alright to drive like an idiot, flaunt the traffics laws and kill someone but if you've had 2 beers and are driving perfectly you should be thrown in jail for life. It's not drunk drivers that are the problem. It's irresponsible drivers whether drunk or sober. People drive like idiots and violate traffic laws with impunity. That's why there is such carnage on our roads. If everyone obeyed traffic laws and drove in a safe responsible manner it would be habit and they would drive that way even after they had a few beers. In the vast majority of drunk driving collisions the primary culprit is not the alcohol but the idiotic, unsafe driving habits of the driver. Start actually enforcing traffic and driving safety laws and you would not only greatly reduce the minority of collisions that are claimed to be caused by someone having a few beers but the majority of collisions that are caused by 100% sober people who drive like idiots.
If you walk up to a cop and he arrests you for DUI, you may have a decent false arrest case on your hands
I don't know. These days you can get a DUI for driving a lawn mower, bicycle, horse or wheel chair and even for not driving your car by sleeping in it while drunk. How long can it be before the MADD morons get sneakers included.
After a day and a half of hold time, call transfers other misc. insanity I'm finally on with the CSR and she apparently has a higher level techie there she's relaying everything from them to me and me to them because HLTs (higher level techies) can't possible communicate with a user. I tell her I can't even ping the DNS servers. She asks what DNS servers I'm using. I tell her and they're correct (had to switch them back from openDNS). So the "HLT" tells her to tell me to try pinging www.somethingoranother.com. I start laughing. She says to HLT: Now he's laughing at me. I explain that if I can't see the Domain Name Server then I'm not going to be able to ping a Domain Name but I'll do it anyway. Took 2 days of crap to get it fixed when I told them what the problem was.
When are these companies going to realize that although people with no technical knowledge are a lot cheaper to higher for tech support it cost them way more in the long run in that a problem that should take 5 minutes to fix ends up taking hours and hours because of cluelessness.
The problem is, as I've been flamed for before, Linux is still nowhere near the point where a non-techie will consider adopting it. Although it's much better than it was even a few years ago, it's still not an idiot-friendly OS where things 'just work', compared to what people are used to.
You've been flamed before because this is just wrong on so many levels it just demonstrates your complete lack of knowledge.
First and foremost Windows does not now and never has "just worked". And it is far less idiot-friendly than the alternatives including Ubuntu. The problem with Windows is that it doesn't even take an idiot to screw it up. Normal use is almost guaranteed to render it useless within a year. That is unless you know how to install and pay for anti-virus software, anti-adware software, install an alternative browser, know what e-mail attachments are safe and which aren't, etc, etc... Yeah, that's surely idiot proof and just works. I could write a book on on cases of Windows just NOT working.
It doesn't take a techie to know that Open Office is a perfect replacement for Microsoft Office. The Verizon thing has nothing to do with Windows just working. Actually Ubuntu would likely just work with her internet connection without having to use the Verizon CD. It most likely has to do with her sticking the CD in and not being able to install the not needed Verizon software and calling Verizon and Verizon telling her that they don't support Linux (had a similar experience with a locked down Windows computer).
I get that all the time when I call for support on internet issues. I tell them I don't want them to support Linux. I want them to fix their damn network. The problem is that these companies hire people who have 0 technical knowledge to do support and doing so costs them boatloads of money in the long run. Example: my neighbor has 2 daughters with laptops. They had several things repaired on both laptops. After they were return neither could connect to the Verizon provided wireless network. The repair rep spent several hours and failed. They spent hours (he said at least 3 hours) on the phone with a Verizon tech who even got them to give him remote desktop control of the computers (wired connection). It took me about a half hour to get both working and most of that was rebooting several times to ensure they would keep working. Did I mention that these were both Windows PC's that should 'just work'? So I guess the techies in this case were just super idiots that even Windows can't protect against?
This is just a recent example. I have a long list of these and I avoid touching Windows. I use it for gaming alone because that's about all it's really good for and only because, again, no one will make their games for Linux. It isn't that Windows just works it's that if you mention Linux everyone states that they won't work with it even though anyone with even half ass technical knowledge who has had to work with both knows that Linux just works far better than any version of Windows.