if you look around you'll find there's just as much evidence saying being uncircumcisied prevents aids as there is vice-versa.
There is not. You just made that up, and you did it with poor grammar, besides. Applying "vice-versa"
to your foregoing statement would result in "aids prevents being uncircumcised".
Or, perhaps you have references other than, "I've heard things like...."
CRN has learned that major interface rework is under way for this important release aimed at surfacing a users' most desired features and functions and eliminating icon clutter.
I can see why some people might like having their icons change around, but I hate it. I want to click where the thing always is and have the thing work. I don't want to click where the [save] icon is and have it silently [print] instead. Make it easy for me to change where they are, sure, but don't change them for me.
When I have to use an XP machine, I lose productivity while the start menu keeps changing depending on what I've just run. I have to keep saying, "ok, where is [foo] now?"
I guess I'm not a good candidate assimilation yet.
Right. The audio book was a "novelization" of the screenplay. That means they added a bunch of descriptive narration to the screenplay that the movie didn't need, because it had pictures.
I think it's still in the car... ah, yes.
"Johnny Mnemonic... A Novel by Terry Bisson... Based on the Short Story and SCREENPLAY by WILLIAM GIBSON... Now A Major Motion Picture..." (emphasis in the original, but) my text rendering doesn't do the cover justice. It's really bad. So was the audio book.
My kids picked up a Johnny Mnemonic audio book at a garage sale. It was an audio recording of a novelization of the screenplay, not written by Gibson. I kinda remembered liking the movie version with Keanu Reaves, so I listened to it on my commute for two... agonizing... days.
What you quoted could have been an excerpt from that, except for the first-person narrative and no reference to anything Japanese.
Spears not used as projectile weapons? Monkeys know how to throw stuff. My dog knows how to throw stuff.
I suppose the shape of the spearhead indicates that they weren't thrown. That's hooey. It just shows that the Neanderthals weren't very good at making spears.
That was great, but how does it contradict what I said?
Now, quit laughing. I know that judges are impartial (or "apartial", which is a distinction without a difference). But once the trial starts, they know who's got it and who doesn't. They intentionally keep their minds open - judicial think, you called it.
A mind isn't open if it isn't processing what it's being given. They don't give a ruling before all the evidence is in, but much of the time the ruling would be no different if they did.
We non-lawyers think of judges as impartial watchers of the courtroom. Sometimes they are. Most of the time, though, they pick a winner and spend the rest of the case guiding the decision the way they think it should go and covering themselves for appeal.
That's how it's been with SCO v IBM. After months and months without any credible evidence, after seeing the SCO group twist his words and the words of Magistrate Judge Wells (who's handling much of the pre-trial bickering), he began to take on a more aggressive tone. He hasn't been on IBM's side, but it looks like he has seen the inevitable result and is trying to make sure his decision doesn't get turned over on appeal.
So when The SCO Group tried to amend their complaint based on an out-of-context reading of IBM's Ninth Counterclaim (a request for a ruling that IBM didn't infringe SCO's copyrights), he said no, that the counterclaim must be read in context. He said they were just delaying. if he thought they had a snowball's chance in July, he might have allowed the change.
For each potential attacker, you have to do a cost-benefit analysis.
For each potential attacker class, and for every attack vector open to that class.
Some avenues of attack are more expensive or more difficult than others, and that depends on the class the attacker fits. Governments can do things that script kiddeez can't afford, while script kiddeez (for example) don't have to get a court order to try.
Also, it's not necessary for attackers to know a priori that compromising your systems will be more expensive than they are willing to bear. It's ok if they find out while they're trying. If their trying compromises your system, you were just bluffing.
Astrology claims to be predictive of the future. It follows that if you know more of the future, you are more powerful. Even so, I didn't say that, either.
then perhaps less people will be inclined to believe in astrology.
Nope, not a chance. The publicity would just legitimize astrology. When the suit was finally decided in NASA's favor, believers would just spin it that NASA had better lawyers.
People who believe in astrology don't do so because of logic. They cling to the hope that the universe is not just a giant machine, that they are somehow made unique among humans by their keen intelligence, inside knowledge, and special placement in it.
A lot of people will post on this story about how weak Windows is, or how great OpenBSD is, or whatever.
The keys to secure computing are
Deciding what you value.
Finding your comfort level - how "secure" do you need to feel?
Creating a multi-layer system to make it more diffificult to attack your network than the next one.
The use of multiple layers is crucial. Never depend on just a firewall, encrypted transmissions, or just on password protection. Never depend on your vendor to secure your data - it's your data, not your vendor's. Read your EULA, and you'll note how little they care.
With corporations, you generally don't see criminal prosecutions. Limited liability is one reason why people use corporations. I don't know whether the Grokster folks would have been held personally liable for their corporate actions.
The ED of the EFF wants to stir up the masses and make us skeered the gummint gonna take away our P2P by letting the RIAA sue anyone who writes a P2P program or runs a peer-based download service.
People who advertise a tool expressly for its illegal purposes were already liable for those eventual uses. The Grokster case merely, and rightly, applied that old-as-the-hills principle to file-sharing services.
Slashdot Mirror
There is not. You just made that up, and you did it with poor grammar, besides. Applying "vice-versa" to your foregoing statement would result in "aids prevents being uncircumcised".
Or, perhaps you have references other than, "I've heard things like ...."
I don't have an XP machine of my own - it's always a user's machine, and I don't want to mess with their settings.
I can see why some people might like having their icons change around, but I hate it. I want to click where the thing always is and have the thing work. I don't want to click where the [save] icon is and have it silently [print] instead. Make it easy for me to change where they are, sure, but don't change them for me.
When I have to use an XP machine, I lose productivity while the start menu keeps changing depending on what I've just run. I have to keep saying, "ok, where is [foo] now?"
I guess I'm not a good candidate assimilation yet.
It's kinda funny. Laugh.
.NET is always capitalized. I betcha if VeriSign started advertising ".NET domains" for sale, the Collective would throw a litigious fit.
Besides,
I don't think that's the method they used in the studies, but if it works for you, fine.
And you must have a huge pair of hefeweizen.
I thought I was going to have to get circumcised.
>screenplay was by Gibson
... ah, yes.
... A Novel by Terry Bisson ... Based on the Short Story and SCREENPLAY by WILLIAM GIBSON ... Now A Major Motion Picture ..." (emphasis in the original, but) my text rendering doesn't do the cover justice. It's really bad. So was the audio book.
Right. The audio book was a "novelization" of the screenplay. That means they added a bunch of descriptive narration to the screenplay that the movie didn't need, because it had pictures.
I think it's still in the car
"Johnny Mnemonic
My kids picked up a Johnny Mnemonic audio book at a garage sale. It was an audio recording of a novelization of the screenplay, not written by Gibson. I kinda remembered liking the movie version with Keanu Reaves, so I listened to it on my commute for two ... agonizing ... days.
What you quoted could have been an excerpt from that, except for the first-person narrative and no reference to anything Japanese.
That was really funny.
Yeah, I saw that later. Bummer.
for an aging actor to get into Lori McCreary's pants. I can't blame him - she's easy on the eyes.
O'course, having seen his off-camera personality, I suspect he's more into the one he has his arm around.
>after all, our species does enjoy killing.
We also like keeping slaves around. I wouldn't be surprised if Neanderthals were kept around for heavy labor.
And to prove that I have the sickest mind around, I bet the females were pretty easy to milk.
Ever been to a swap meet? A lot of that stuff is, uh, warm to the touch.
Spears not used as projectile weapons? Monkeys know how to throw stuff. My dog knows how to throw stuff.
I suppose the shape of the spearhead indicates that they weren't thrown. That's hooey. It just shows that the Neanderthals weren't very good at making spears.
or a railroad hitchhiker. The train's going to Chicago whether I'm on it or not, and except for the smell, no one would notice I was there.
Who was harmed by this guy?
I guess the ISP was denied a hypothetical customer.
That was great, but how does it contradict what I said?
Now, quit laughing. I know that judges are impartial (or "apartial", which is a distinction without a difference). But once the trial starts, they know who's got it and who doesn't. They intentionally keep their minds open - judicial think, you called it.
A mind isn't open if it isn't processing what it's being given. They don't give a ruling before all the evidence is in, but much of the time the ruling would be no different if they did.
I think it's unavoidable that a judge will pick a winner before the end of the trial. I imagine sometimes their minds are changed midway.
Judge Kimball is on to them.
We non-lawyers think of judges as impartial watchers of the courtroom. Sometimes they are. Most of the time, though, they pick a winner and spend the rest of the case guiding the decision the way they think it should go and covering themselves for appeal.
That's how it's been with SCO v IBM. After months and months without any credible evidence, after seeing the SCO group twist his words and the words of Magistrate Judge Wells (who's handling much of the pre-trial bickering), he began to take on a more aggressive tone. He hasn't been on IBM's side, but it looks like he has seen the inevitable result and is trying to make sure his decision doesn't get turned over on appeal.
So when The SCO Group tried to amend their complaint based on an out-of-context reading of IBM's Ninth Counterclaim (a request for a ruling that IBM didn't infringe SCO's copyrights), he said no, that the counterclaim must be read in context. He said they were just delaying. if he thought they had a snowball's chance in July, he might have allowed the change.
For each potential attacker class, and for every attack vector open to that class.
Some avenues of attack are more expensive or more difficult than others, and that depends on the class the attacker fits. Governments can do things that script kiddeez can't afford, while script kiddeez (for example) don't have to get a court order to try.
Also, it's not necessary for attackers to know a priori that compromising your systems will be more expensive than they are willing to bear. It's ok if they find out while they're trying. If their trying compromises your system, you were just bluffing.
I said, "not just a giant machine".
Astrology claims to be predictive of the future. It follows that if you know more of the future, you are more powerful. Even so, I didn't say that, either.
Nope, not a chance. The publicity would just legitimize astrology. When the suit was finally decided in NASA's favor, believers would just spin it that NASA had better lawyers.
People who believe in astrology don't do so because of logic. They cling to the hope that the universe is not just a giant machine, that they are somehow made unique among humans by their keen intelligence, inside knowledge, and special placement in it.
Oh, but surely computers will be faster by then? :-).
A lot of people will post on this story about how weak Windows is, or how great OpenBSD is, or whatever.
The keys to secure computing are
The use of multiple layers is crucial. Never depend on just a firewall, encrypted transmissions, or just on password protection. Never depend on your vendor to secure your data - it's your data, not your vendor's. Read your EULA, and you'll note how little they care.
It was a civil case.
With corporations, you generally don't see criminal prosecutions. Limited liability is one reason why people use corporations. I don't know whether the Grokster folks would have been held personally liable for their corporate actions.
But hey, I'm not a lawyer.
The Grokster decision was Good.
The ED of the EFF wants to stir up the masses and make us skeered the gummint gonna take away our P2P by letting the RIAA sue anyone who writes a P2P program or runs a peer-based download service.
People who advertise a tool expressly for its illegal purposes were already liable for those eventual uses. The Grokster case merely, and rightly, applied that old-as-the-hills principle to file-sharing services.
EFF is fearmongering for donations.