Yes that's a much better plan to letting people keep their money, pay for things they want, thus giving money to people to produce those things (and creating useful jobs).
I'm not the customer of the pork rendering facility in the next county, and yet I feel no qualms about pressuring them not to dump putrid pork grease into the river. etc.
Once again, you actually benefit from day traders because of liquidity. The downside is that a lot of people lose money on it, but that's the risk they chose to take.
Day traders had no small hand in the latest economic collapse, for which we all pay the price.
Day traders had no influence on the economic problems. They were caused by people making mostly rational* decisions based on an irrational market. The government said everyone needs to be able to get a house loan, and pressured banks into making those loans. As a result, more people bought homes, driving up the price. Based on the increasing prices, different people got into the market building houses or buying houses to repair, or just buying houses knowing that their value would go up. When people started to not be able to pay their mortgages (the point where the influence of the government is defeated by reality), houses lost value, people lost a bunch of people, banks lost a bunch of money, and the rest of the economy reacted to the huge loss of capital. Where in this picture do the day traders come in?
* I say mostly rational because some people looked into WHY the prices were going up and decided to get out of the market, which was actually the best decision.
I wouldn't want to pressure the government into outlawing day trading unless it could be shown to have a very high societal cost versus societal benefit. I just think we as a society should regard day traders as we do used car salesmen, multi level marketers, and other con men who view their customers and trading partners as 'suckers' to be taken advantage of, rather than as real partners in a win-win scenario
There's nothing wrong with being a used car salesmen. There's a problem with using fraud to sell things, but the fact that some used car salesman commit fraud says nothing about whether used car salesmen are good or bad. The others you list are also examples of fraud, where the problem is the fraud, not the business. If I check out a car and decide it's worth buying, then buy it from a used car salesman, I consider it win-win. Similarly, if want to buy stocks in a company, I can buy those stocks from a day trader. I get the stocks I want immediately at a price I'm willing to pay, and they receive money for the stocks that they don't want anymore. I'd compare a bad used car salesman to the people who try to sell people "guides to the stock market" or who recommend buying their stocks so they can make money, and one more time: the problem is the fraud, not the business.
Isn't this what we want? I mean, it's higher power under load because it switches to "fast mode" faster. Isn't that good? Yes it uses more power, but if the goal was to use as little power as possible, we'd just lock the processor in "slow mode".
Pressure banks into giving loans to anyone who wants the commodity, regardless of their credit.
Introduce complicated unnecessary regulations that make it extremely expensive to produce the commodity.
Declare that only the government can produce the commodity.
Introduce subsidies paying people not to produce the commodity.
I could go on all day. Vote for me! I guarantee all of them will work as long as I'm in office. As a bonus, you can vote for someone you don't like right after me and then blame them for the completely unexpected problems with the economy.
The tuna in the example are day traders who lose money. They knew the risks when they bought stocks (unless they were lied to by one of those "OMG DAYTRADERS ARE ALL RICH" books, but that's a different problem).
when the tuna is a citizen of a democracy where it can vote to outlaw sharks?
This is democracy we're talking about, so presumable the crappy day traders could put a cap on the IQ of people doing trading, and also forcibly retire them after 5 years (thus outlawing "the sharks"). I don't think it would have the happy ending you're hoping for though.
I assume your real question is "Why shouldn't I pressure the government into outlawing daytrading or the stock exchange" and the answer is that (a) everyone who risks they money by buying stocks knows that they could loose it, (b) the stock exchange benefits society by providing capital to new businesses, (c) day trading benefits the stock exchange by adding liquidity (look at the other posts for descriptions of this), and (d) it's none of your business -- even if, as some people assume, day trading is useless, it's just as useless as professional sports. People who hire professional athletes think that they are worth the millions they get paid, and the stock market as a whole seems to think that traders are worth what they are paid. Just remember, you're not their customer.
I think day traders probably have little power over what the industry is doing, since they don't stay investors long enough to go to board meetings or anything. What's more important are the people who buy into a company, pressure it into insane business practices for short term profits (or simply go along with short-term profit motivated plans), then cut and run and get away with it because they have no liability when the company goes bankrupt.
Marginal? With current credit card security, any waiter can take your card, write down your name, account number, svn number, expiration date, then at any time in the future, buy stuff as you. If they need a keyfob, it would be MUCH more obvious because they need to not only take the keyfob, but keep it (because writing it down would be useless). And what if they buy something on a computer in the back room while you think they're just charging your card for dinner? When it shows up on your credit card statement it would be incredibly easy to find out who did it.
I'm aware of sprintf(), but putting the variables where they go is much easier to read, and when you're writing out an entire (large) page in HTML, putting all the variables in order at the end isn't very helpful.
There's a difference between having a weak immune system and being allergic to a vaccine. For example, I've never had Whooping Cough (Pertussis), but if you give me the Pertussis vaccine I'll get extremely sick or die.
I like the way of referring to $variables in PHP. It's one extra letter and makes it much easier to read the code sometimes (especially if you use PHP's string parsing).
PHP's biggest advantage is the documentation, which is easily the best out there (well written Javadoc style + examples + comments). It's biggest problem is that you NEED the documentation. Constantly.
Also, in PHP classes, you HAVE to use $this everytime. So if you have public $foo in a class, it's always going to be $this->foo, which I find extremely annoying. Especially when putting class variables into strings, because then it's {$this->foo}. PHP objects were horrifically slow in 5.2, but supposedly they're better in 5.3.
It was probably was the easiest language I've ever learned though.
What you've overlooked is that a name can be used for both an operating system and the kernel of that operating system, if they people who have the naming rights decide to do so.
They can, but didn't.
The earlier builders of operating systems that comprised a Linux kernel plus many GNU utilities plus other open source software decided to name the OS after the kernel. They are the ones who put together the complete package, so they got to name it. Hence, it is Linux.
Wrong. The operating systems are NOT named Linux. They are named Ubuntu, Fedora, Gentoo, Debian GNU/Linux (yes this one has Linux IN its name, I'm hoping you understand the distinction between Linux being part of the name and not being the name). Just read their pages:
openSUSE is a free and Linux-based operating system
Ubuntu is a community developed, Linux-based operating system
Fedora is a Linux-based operating system
Debian is a free operating system (OS) for your computer -- note: Debian is somewhat inconsistent, because they refer to the "GNU/Linux" operating system, but they still never call Linux an operating system
Enterprise Linuxes tend to be less clear about it (Red Hat Enterprise Linux, SUSE Linux Enterprise), but the name of the operating system is still not just Linux.
You seem to be making the same argument I am (the kernel is not the OS). If you took Linux kernel + System7 userland, you don't get Linux, you get an operating system that is the combination of both of them. Same as when you take Linux + GNU or kFreeBSD + GNU or Linux + BSD userland. Linux fanboys want to say that the kernel defines the operating system, and GNU fanboys want to say the userland defines the operating system. I say it's the combination. So the Linux kernel is not an operating system. GNU without a kernel isn't an operating system, but Debian, Fedora, FreeBSD and GNU+HURD are all operating systems. When I say "Linux is not an operating system", I mean the kernel, but because no operating system is officially named "Linux", there's just a group of them that are commonly called Linuxes.
I think you're confusing "important part of an operating system" with an operating system. Linux is definitely not an operating system, it's just a common term to refer to Linux-based operating systems (because the average person doesn't care). Just like the FreeBSD kernel alone isn't an operating system. Debian and FreeBSD are operating systems. GNU appears to be a complete operating system (although not finished). I think you can install it from here: http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd/running/gnu.html.
Need a simple proof that Linux isn't an operating system? Download the kernel and boot it (oh wait, you can't because GRUB isn't part of the kernel), do some stuff on the command line (bash is not part of the kernel either), maybe update some programs (apt isn't part of the kernel). Oh wait you say, I don't need apt, I can just download the source and compile it myself... but wget and gcc aren't part of the kernel either.
And don't take this to mean I think we should call it GNU/Linux. People can call their operating system whatever they want. If they wanted every piece of software that uses GNU to be called GNU/Software, it should be in the license. My point is just that kernel != operating system.
Because Debian is not Linux and Linux is not an operating system. Debian is an operating system that uses either the Linux kernel, FreeBSD kernel, or HURD. Don't confuse the fact that the Linux version is most popular with the idea that it's the only one. The Debian project doesn't produce any kernel, so using the FreeBSD kernel is not any more of a "mix" than using the Linux kernel.
As to why you'd want it: apt.
What I don't understand is why you would use a certificate instead of PGP keys for email. Isn't it the same web of trust deal (except anyone can sign your key, and you can trust who you want to).
My suggestion is to set your port to something that isn't 22, but still a low number port (less than 1024 I think). It's still a decent amount of obscurity, and doesn't add another security risk. My thinking is that obscurity is a part of good security, but you shouldn't compromise real security for it.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes that's a much better plan to letting people keep their money, pay for things they want, thus giving money to people to produce those things (and creating useful jobs).
They'd discover that the total size of all bittorrent swarms has suddenly decreased ;)
I'm not the customer of the pork rendering facility in the next county, and yet I feel no qualms about pressuring them not to dump putrid pork grease into the river.
etc.
Once again, you actually benefit from day traders because of liquidity. The downside is that a lot of people lose money on it, but that's the risk they chose to take.
Day traders had no small hand in the latest economic collapse, for which we all pay the price.
Day traders had no influence on the economic problems. They were caused by people making mostly rational* decisions based on an irrational market. The government said everyone needs to be able to get a house loan, and pressured banks into making those loans. As a result, more people bought homes, driving up the price. Based on the increasing prices, different people got into the market building houses or buying houses to repair, or just buying houses knowing that their value would go up. When people started to not be able to pay their mortgages (the point where the influence of the government is defeated by reality), houses lost value, people lost a bunch of people, banks lost a bunch of money, and the rest of the economy reacted to the huge loss of capital. Where in this picture do the day traders come in?
* I say mostly rational because some people looked into WHY the prices were going up and decided to get out of the market, which was actually the best decision.
I wouldn't want to pressure the government into outlawing day trading unless it could be shown to have a very high societal cost versus societal benefit. I just think we as a society should regard day traders as we do used car salesmen, multi level marketers, and other con men who view their customers and trading partners as 'suckers' to be taken advantage of, rather than as real partners in a win-win scenario
There's nothing wrong with being a used car salesmen. There's a problem with using fraud to sell things, but the fact that some used car salesman commit fraud says nothing about whether used car salesmen are good or bad. The others you list are also examples of fraud, where the problem is the fraud, not the business. If I check out a car and decide it's worth buying, then buy it from a used car salesman, I consider it win-win. Similarly, if want to buy stocks in a company, I can buy those stocks from a day trader. I get the stocks I want immediately at a price I'm willing to pay, and they receive money for the stocks that they don't want anymore. I'd compare a bad used car salesman to the people who try to sell people "guides to the stock market" or who recommend buying their stocks so they can make money, and one more time: the problem is the fraud, not the business.
Isn't this what we want? I mean, it's higher power under load because it switches to "fast mode" faster. Isn't that good? Yes it uses more power, but if the goal was to use as little power as possible, we'd just lock the processor in "slow mode".
I could go on all day. Vote for me! I guarantee all of them will work as long as I'm in office. As a bonus, you can vote for someone you don't like right after me and then blame them for the completely unexpected problems with the economy.
Why should a tuna let itself be eaten by a shark
The tuna in the example are day traders who lose money. They knew the risks when they bought stocks (unless they were lied to by one of those "OMG DAYTRADERS ARE ALL RICH" books, but that's a different problem).
when the tuna is a citizen of a democracy where it can vote to outlaw sharks?
This is democracy we're talking about, so presumable the crappy day traders could put a cap on the IQ of people doing trading, and also forcibly retire them after 5 years (thus outlawing "the sharks"). I don't think it would have the happy ending you're hoping for though.
I assume your real question is "Why shouldn't I pressure the government into outlawing daytrading or the stock exchange" and the answer is that (a) everyone who risks they money by buying stocks knows that they could loose it, (b) the stock exchange benefits society by providing capital to new businesses, (c) day trading benefits the stock exchange by adding liquidity (look at the other posts for descriptions of this), and (d) it's none of your business -- even if, as some people assume, day trading is useless, it's just as useless as professional sports. People who hire professional athletes think that they are worth the millions they get paid, and the stock market as a whole seems to think that traders are worth what they are paid. Just remember, you're not their customer.
I think day traders probably have little power over what the industry is doing, since they don't stay investors long enough to go to board meetings or anything. What's more important are the people who buy into a company, pressure it into insane business practices for short term profits (or simply go along with short-term profit motivated plans), then cut and run and get away with it because they have no liability when the company goes bankrupt.
I missed up, it's actually a CVN number. And it's a card verification number number (or card verification number^2 if you prefer).
Marginal? With current credit card security, any waiter can take your card, write down your name, account number, svn number, expiration date, then at any time in the future, buy stuff as you. If they need a keyfob, it would be MUCH more obvious because they need to not only take the keyfob, but keep it (because writing it down would be useless). And what if they buy something on a computer in the back room while you think they're just charging your card for dinner? When it shows up on your credit card statement it would be incredibly easy to find out who did it.
Plus, you don't just do something for lulz, you do it "for the lulz". You'd think Slashdot users would be more literate..
I'm aware of sprintf(), but putting the variables where they go is much easier to read, and when you're writing out an entire (large) page in HTML, putting all the variables in order at the end isn't very helpful.
Portal GT works perfectly in Wine. And seriously.. Portal is MUCH better than any other MUD client.
There's a difference between having a weak immune system and being allergic to a vaccine. For example, I've never had Whooping Cough (Pertussis), but if you give me the Pertussis vaccine I'll get extremely sick or die.
No, but if you consider what PHP is useful for (websites):
echo "Customer Name: $customer_name\nAddress: $st_address $city, $state\nOrder: $order_info";
is much better than:
echo "Customer Name: " . customer_name . "\nAddress: " . st_address . " " . city . " " . state . "\nOrder: " . order_info;
$var isn't bad at all compared to ".var." when writing a string (and I'm guessing more than 6% of my php code is writing strings like this).
I like the way of referring to $variables in PHP. It's one extra letter and makes it much easier to read the code sometimes (especially if you use PHP's string parsing).
PHP's biggest advantage is the documentation, which is easily the best out there (well written Javadoc style + examples + comments). It's biggest problem is that you NEED the documentation. Constantly.
Also, in PHP classes, you HAVE to use $this everytime. So if you have public $foo in a class, it's always going to be $this->foo, which I find extremely annoying. Especially when putting class variables into strings, because then it's {$this->foo}. PHP objects were horrifically slow in 5.2, but supposedly they're better in 5.3.
It was probably was the easiest language I've ever learned though.
What you've overlooked is that a name can be used for both an operating system and the kernel of that operating system, if they people who have the naming rights decide to do so.
They can, but didn't.
The earlier builders of operating systems that comprised a Linux kernel plus many GNU utilities plus other open source software decided to name the OS after the kernel. They are the ones who put together the complete package, so they got to name it. Hence, it is Linux.
Wrong. The operating systems are NOT named Linux. They are named Ubuntu, Fedora, Gentoo, Debian GNU/Linux (yes this one has Linux IN its name, I'm hoping you understand the distinction between Linux being part of the name and not being the name). Just read their pages:
Enterprise Linuxes tend to be less clear about it (Red Hat Enterprise Linux, SUSE Linux Enterprise), but the name of the operating system is still not just Linux.
You seem to be making the same argument I am (the kernel is not the OS). If you took Linux kernel + System7 userland, you don't get Linux, you get an operating system that is the combination of both of them. Same as when you take Linux + GNU or kFreeBSD + GNU or Linux + BSD userland. Linux fanboys want to say that the kernel defines the operating system, and GNU fanboys want to say the userland defines the operating system. I say it's the combination. So the Linux kernel is not an operating system. GNU without a kernel isn't an operating system, but Debian, Fedora, FreeBSD and GNU+HURD are all operating systems. When I say "Linux is not an operating system", I mean the kernel, but because no operating system is officially named "Linux", there's just a group of them that are commonly called Linuxes.
I think you're confusing "important part of an operating system" with an operating system. Linux is definitely not an operating system, it's just a common term to refer to Linux-based operating systems (because the average person doesn't care). Just like the FreeBSD kernel alone isn't an operating system. Debian and FreeBSD are operating systems. GNU appears to be a complete operating system (although not finished). I think you can install it from here: http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd/running/gnu.html.
Need a simple proof that Linux isn't an operating system? Download the kernel and boot it (oh wait, you can't because GRUB isn't part of the kernel), do some stuff on the command line (bash is not part of the kernel either), maybe update some programs (apt isn't part of the kernel). Oh wait you say, I don't need apt, I can just download the source and compile it myself... but wget and gcc aren't part of the kernel either.
And don't take this to mean I think we should call it GNU/Linux. People can call their operating system whatever they want. If they wanted every piece of software that uses GNU to be called GNU/Software, it should be in the license. My point is just that kernel != operating system.
Because Debian is not Linux and Linux is not an operating system. Debian is an operating system that uses either the Linux kernel, FreeBSD kernel, or HURD. Don't confuse the fact that the Linux version is most popular with the idea that it's the only one. The Debian project doesn't produce any kernel, so using the FreeBSD kernel is not any more of a "mix" than using the Linux kernel. As to why you'd want it: apt.
I think executing someone for changing the password on a computer may be a little harsh. I mean, it's not like he installed Windows ME on it.
But it's pretty clear who's responsibility it is. Microsoft needs to update the Windows Crypto API. Mozilla products are already patched.
What I don't understand is why you would use a certificate instead of PGP keys for email. Isn't it the same web of trust deal (except anyone can sign your key, and you can trust who you want to).
I just read that and it sounds like a patent for Javascript..
My suggestion is to set your port to something that isn't 22, but still a low number port (less than 1024 I think). It's still a decent amount of obscurity, and doesn't add another security risk. My thinking is that obscurity is a part of good security, but you shouldn't compromise real security for it.