On the other hand, this war - even more than most - really is fought through public opinion.
Excellent point, although it seems to me that most people outside the US (and plenty within) think that Israel's actions have been grossly excessive but it hasn't made much difference. Maybe it will in the long term. One can only hope.
Agreed, it's not a troll but it's still a ridiculous idea! The whole idea of the US just going in and taking stuff out hasn't really worked out recently has it?
Argh, I've got to bite. First, let me say I really don't take sides in this conflict. Neither side has behaved anywhere near approaching sensibility, but you just made some ridiculous statements and have clearly sided 100% with the Israelis.
If there was ever a nation that was responsible with their nuclear weapons, Israel is it.
Come on, Israel is not likely to use nuclear weapons against the Palestinian territories given their proximity and how highly Isreal values the land. Also, how many nations have ever been irresponsible with nuclear weapons anyway? You make it sound like they deserve credit for not nuking palestinian territories.
An entire population brainwashed into being soldiers for a war that doesn't need to happen.
I don't deny that culturally it can be difficult to relate to some Palestinian and extremist muslim behaviour, but they're only human. When you're being starved and/or bombed, it doesn't take a lot to persuade someone that violence is the answer. Similarly, those people aren't beyond rehabilitation when the conflict is over.
It's always frustrating to listen to the average person talk about the situation in Israel.
Ah, if only everyone were above average! Look, there are plenty of intelligent people who will disagree with you. There's no need to get a superiority complex.
The only thing that becomes clear is that they have no concept of the current status nor history of the situation and have no desire to learn. They just buy into the anti-Israel propaganda.
Oh come on, there's propaganda on both sides - and realistically Israel has way more resource for producing propaganda. Some people buy into one side, and it sounds like you've bought into the other. Personally I don't take a side, the whole conflict needs sorting out and both sides are to blame for it not happening before now.
not at all:
- install XP with network unplugged
- turn on firewall
- plug in network
XP didn't come with a firewall. You had to upgrade to SP2 (IIRC) to get the Windows firewall. Granted, if you bought XP after SP2 was released you'd have the firewall, otherwise you can potentially get infected very quickly... way before you get the chance to download SP2 and enable the firewall.
Does it come with easy access to the "restricted" repositories?
Well it's certainly easier now since all the "restricted" repositories are now in one place - RPM Fusion. So you just install the rpmfusion rpm and then you get access to all the goodies. Not too sure how this is presented GUI-wise though.
Liquid cooled, not water cooled. They cool it in an inert liquid, rather than water.
No. From TFA:
"One of our most important decisions was to invest in water-cooled racks from Rittal, which allows us to precisely control the amount of cooling that a specific rack requires," said Shand.
The article says "it overcame the built in system redundancy"... how the hell does ONE failing card in a redundant setup "overcome" the redundant backup parts/systems ??
I suspect it's because, as mentioned in the summary, it was "an intermittent malfunctioning network card". i.e. the failover system must have thought the card was functioning.
It all looks like blurry gas station cameras from 10 years ago right now.
You're probably referring to images which are from 10 year old equipment. In the last couple of years high resolution digital cameras have started to become the norm for serious CCTV installations, although gas stations probably still use the crappy old analogue cameras with cheap multiplexing recorders.
As a poster said above, instead of trying to get the Pan/Tilt/Zoom cameras to swivel round after an incident has started (since it may have already finished), just use decent high-resolution cameras instead and cover the required area permanently.
I work in the CCTV industry in London and was involved in some of the high-profile terrorist investigations in the last few years so I feel I have to comment.
There seems to be a media campaign against CCTV which has been amplified recently despite the many successes of which I hear on a daily basis. The reports that I've being reading in the media strike me as being sensationalist and far from what I've been seeing "on the ground".
The 3 percent figure which was touted the other day is utter rubbish. Maybe 3% of crimes were proven by CCTV, but the vast majority of those were likely to be violent crimes, in which case the police actually bother to obtain the footage. In many other cases CCTV is an enabling factor. For example, if there is a brawl outside a pub in a town or city centre, it is likely to be spotted on camera and the police can respond quickly. When the police arrive, they see the fight, and their visual accounts are sufficient for a prosecution - no need to obtain the footage in many cases. Doesn't mean the CCTV had no input.
Most of these stories regarding policy are referring to "city centre CCTV" yet they always quote numbers of cameras in total, i.e. including private premises, shops, facilities, etc...
In a lot of shops, the cameras are used to settle customer disputes ("I gave you 20 not 10", "Ok sir, let's check the camera and sort it out"), and most importantly, theft by staff. There is certainly a lot of crime committed within private organisations which gets settled behind the scenes, i.e. theiving employee gets fired. I'm sure that doesn't get accounted in the 3 percent figure.
As just mentioned, these stories focus on city centres. It's not all-pervasive, it's more like: If your dog craps in the high-street or outside the shopping centre (mall to you guys!) you stand the risk of getting punished. The same thing applies to smoking weed and other minor offences. They don't monitor anything except the busy areas where families are out going about their business. If you want a cheeky smoke or underage drink, find somewhere quiet, nobody cares, just don't do it in the main high street.
The bottom line is, if it didn't work, the authorities wouldn't keep spending money on it.
Absolutely spot on, shame I spent all my mod points yesterday! These "CCTV is evil" articles are getting ridiculous, despite the popularity of the tin-foil hat meme around here.
Sensible discussion about the pros and cons is welcome of course, but you don't see any articles on here about the successes.
...provide more realistic fog (for all those games that are set in London, I guess)... Great post but FFS, that's such an annoying Hollywood-peddled misconception. I've lived in London for 29 years and I can tell you we get way more sun than fog, i.e. about 20 days of sun per year and about 2 days of fog. Now if you were talking about rain effects...
A: Guerilla activism by open source software advocates in which they uninstall Windows on a PC and replace it with Linux Ah, that'll be a "Die Dreadful Operating System!" attack.
Slashdot Mirror
Why do you think it's come up for a third time on Slashdot?
Roland Piquepaille withdrawal symptoms?
On the other hand, this war - even more than most - really is fought through public opinion.
Excellent point, although it seems to me that most people outside the US (and plenty within) think that Israel's actions have been grossly excessive but it hasn't made much difference. Maybe it will in the long term. One can only hope.
Let's face it, Europeans hate Jews and will always hate Jews...
As a European I've got to say that's absolute rubbish. Can't believe you got modded up for peddling such bullshit.
Agreed, it's not a troll but it's still a ridiculous idea! The whole idea of the US just going in and taking stuff out hasn't really worked out recently has it?
Argh, I've got to bite. First, let me say I really don't take sides in this conflict. Neither side has behaved anywhere near approaching sensibility, but you just made some ridiculous statements and have clearly sided 100% with the Israelis.
If there was ever a nation that was responsible with their nuclear weapons, Israel is it.
Come on, Israel is not likely to use nuclear weapons against the Palestinian territories given their proximity and how highly Isreal values the land. Also, how many nations have ever been irresponsible with nuclear weapons anyway? You make it sound like they deserve credit for not nuking palestinian territories.
An entire population brainwashed into being soldiers for a war that doesn't need to happen.
I don't deny that culturally it can be difficult to relate to some Palestinian and extremist muslim behaviour, but they're only human. When you're being starved and/or bombed, it doesn't take a lot to persuade someone that violence is the answer. Similarly, those people aren't beyond rehabilitation when the conflict is over.
It's always frustrating to listen to the average person talk about the situation in Israel.
Ah, if only everyone were above average! Look, there are plenty of intelligent people who will disagree with you. There's no need to get a superiority complex.
The only thing that becomes clear is that they have no concept of the current status nor history of the situation and have no desire to learn. They just buy into the anti-Israel propaganda.
Oh come on, there's propaganda on both sides - and realistically Israel has way more resource for producing propaganda. Some people buy into one side, and it sounds like you've bought into the other. Personally I don't take a side, the whole conflict needs sorting out and both sides are to blame for it not happening before now.
Mod parent up! Excellent post.
Obviously the whole situation is more complex than just the US relationship with Israel, but that is a huge factor and you summed it up well.
"Simplifying risk to a single number" oh, by the way, what's the current terror level?
Hopefully not 42!
Saddam Hussein was going to do this with PS2s.
Sadly he didn't have time to do the write-up.
not at all: - install XP with network unplugged - turn on firewall - plug in network
XP didn't come with a firewall. You had to upgrade to SP2 (IIRC) to get the Windows firewall. Granted, if you bought XP after SP2 was released you'd have the firewall, otherwise you can potentially get infected very quickly... way before you get the chance to download SP2 and enable the firewall.
A distro for tweakers that ships Gnome by default? Gasp!
There's a KDE spin too and has been for the last two releases at least. Just take your pick.
Seems you can enable rpm-fusion during the installation so you're up and running straight away. Very nice. This blog post provides useful details.
The torrent is working fine for me, albeit a little slow.
Does it come with easy access to the "restricted" repositories?
Well it's certainly easier now since all the "restricted" repositories are now in one place - RPM Fusion. So you just install the rpmfusion rpm and then you get access to all the goodies. Not too sure how this is presented GUI-wise though.
We picked up a huge bin at a garage sale last summer.
So, it was you!
How about the ISS? I doubt it's going to be of much use by the time the materials are ready.
Liquid cooled, not water cooled. They cool it in an inert liquid, rather than water.
No. From TFA: "One of our most important decisions was to invest in water-cooled racks from Rittal, which allows us to precisely control the amount of cooling that a specific rack requires," said Shand.
The article says "it overcame the built in system redundancy"... how the hell does ONE failing card in a redundant setup "overcome" the redundant backup parts/systems ??
I suspect it's because, as mentioned in the summary, it was "an intermittent malfunctioning network card". i.e. the failover system must have thought the card was functioning.
Yes, I see them now. Mine was the 3rd or 4th post, before the others, but it's been pushed down as it was a top-level reply. Oh well! :)
The default vi colors on a fresh Gentoo install are absolutely beautiful
Could you check what they are and post them please? I'd like to try it but don't have that kind of time.
This was discussed just a couple of months ago... http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/08/2213222
You're probably referring to images which are from 10 year old equipment. In the last couple of years high resolution digital cameras have started to become the norm for serious CCTV installations, although gas stations probably still use the crappy old analogue cameras with cheap multiplexing recorders.
As a poster said above, instead of trying to get the Pan/Tilt/Zoom cameras to swivel round after an incident has started (since it may have already finished), just use decent high-resolution cameras instead and cover the required area permanently.
I work in the CCTV industry in London and was involved in some of the high-profile terrorist investigations in the last few years so I feel I have to comment.
There seems to be a media campaign against CCTV which has been amplified recently despite the many successes of which I hear on a daily basis. The reports that I've being reading in the media strike me as being sensationalist and far from what I've been seeing "on the ground".
The 3 percent figure which was touted the other day is utter rubbish. Maybe 3% of crimes were proven by CCTV, but the vast majority of those were likely to be violent crimes, in which case the police actually bother to obtain the footage. In many other cases CCTV is an enabling factor. For example, if there is a brawl outside a pub in a town or city centre, it is likely to be spotted on camera and the police can respond quickly. When the police arrive, they see the fight, and their visual accounts are sufficient for a prosecution - no need to obtain the footage in many cases. Doesn't mean the CCTV had no input.
Most of these stories regarding policy are referring to "city centre CCTV" yet they always quote numbers of cameras in total, i.e. including private premises, shops, facilities, etc... In a lot of shops, the cameras are used to settle customer disputes ("I gave you 20 not 10", "Ok sir, let's check the camera and sort it out"), and most importantly, theft by staff. There is certainly a lot of crime committed within private organisations which gets settled behind the scenes, i.e. theiving employee gets fired. I'm sure that doesn't get accounted in the 3 percent figure.
As just mentioned, these stories focus on city centres. It's not all-pervasive, it's more like: If your dog craps in the high-street or outside the shopping centre (mall to you guys!) you stand the risk of getting punished. The same thing applies to smoking weed and other minor offences. They don't monitor anything except the busy areas where families are out going about their business. If you want a cheeky smoke or underage drink, find somewhere quiet, nobody cares, just don't do it in the main high street. The bottom line is, if it didn't work, the authorities wouldn't keep spending money on it.
Absolutely spot on, shame I spent all my mod points yesterday! These "CCTV is evil" articles are getting ridiculous, despite the popularity of the tin-foil hat meme around here. Sensible discussion about the pros and cons is welcome of course, but you don't see any articles on here about the successes.
...provide more realistic fog (for all those games that are set in London, I guess)... Great post but FFS, that's such an annoying Hollywood-peddled misconception. I've lived in London for 29 years and I can tell you we get way more sun than fog, i.e. about 20 days of sun per year and about 2 days of fog. Now if you were talking about rain effects...A: Guerilla activism by open source software advocates in which they uninstall Windows on a PC and replace it with Linux
Ah, that'll be a "Die Dreadful Operating System!" attack.