Absolutely that sounds like fun! Do you enjoy cookie cutter recipes for defeating monsters? Thats just rote bullshit, boring as hell. What if the enemy actually thought about things, changed its strategy, etc.? What if the big boss changed his minions around, moved them to better spots, changed the order in which you see them, etc? Man, that would be awesome. Guess what bro - "fun" is not guaranteed kills. That is boring as shit. Fun is the fear of death, strategizing, running away going "WTF!!!" and having to completely rethink the encounter. I would love that. As it is, these encounters are lame, boring and simply following the recipe for victory.
Since when is "fun" equated with completely linear known results from repetitive activity?
Thats why I hate listening to folks whine about twinks in WoW. Because its not "fun" to lose. Just think of those guys are really smart bosses, and good luck. I would love to be able to finally defeat a super smart, devious, powerful boss. Victory should be hard fought and truly be an accomplishment. Not "gather this many buffs, sneak in here, shoot that guy, wait 5 seconds, hit him with 10 of this, switch to the other guy walking by (wait 3 secs to shoot him) blah blah blah blah." BORING.
Frigging twitchy kids. You have no sense of accomplishment, just a sense of entitlement to "fun." You whine and complain that things are "hard" and not fun for you. I just don't understand how a known outcome of a known sequence of events is fun in any fucking way. Of course, I have a fully functional brain that hasn't been spoon fed "accomplishment" because I am breathing and somehow entitled to it.
Actually, as I read it, it was collusion between DuPont chemical and Hearst. Hearst published the yellow press which got "marihuana" banned before anybody knew they were banning hemp. DuPont had recently been awarded several patents on the sulfuric acid process used to break down tree fiber to be usable as paper, as well as the invention of Nylon. It meant huge sales for DuPont, and also protected Hearsts vast forest lands as a source of income.
Hemp had in the previous decades become a very viable source of newsprint paper as a new process had also been invented to make it much easier to break down hemp fiber for paper use. The owner of the wood fiber process obviously won out. The hemp process was a machine kinda like a cotton gin. Not a lot of renewable profits for the owner unlike the chemical process of DuPonts.
The DuPont patented process meant huge profits for them in licensing and chemicals. The hemp technique was mechanical and would have seriously cut into their new profit stream.
Really it was all about paper and rope. I am surely not exact in my knowledge so take this with a grain of salt, but I did read the Emporer Wears No Clothes some years ago and it was enlightening. The great thing about the book is half of it is actual photocopy of the public record evidence. The newpaper articles, the legislation, transcripts from congressional hearings, all of it is right there to support the conspiracy theory. At the end the conclusion is pretty clear.
Hey dont preach your shit here, you are just a dumbass addict. 12-step programs are, obviously, bullshit. Why dont you just stop using? Have a bit of a self control problem? 12 step "programs" are scams designed to bilk you of, most usually, lots of money going to "treatment". Fuck off you drug war zombie propaganda machine.
Usually this crap book is sent around by the PHB's as a preemptive strike against layoffs down the line.
It basically tells you that it is a good thing to get fired and you are a pussy if you don't want to get fired. I once worked for a corporation that bought crates of these books, gave one to every employee during "training" and then layed off a third of the company at the end of the quarter.
The reality is, engineers are notoriously horrible at initial estimates. Ego, depth of understanding, many things can contribute to a poor estimate. The more complex a solution is, the harder it is to estimate. Especially DURING a meeting laying out a project. I have made that were completely accurate, and those massive ones that were an order of magnitude wrong. Those always take a lot of time to break the problem down, in fact in those projects we charge the customer just to estimate time/complexity and give them a quote, as it takes quite a bit of fact finding to really suss out the details.
Making the customer happy is a business decision. It is not up to an engineer to make such a decision on his own. How does he know this customer hasn't played games with developers for a long time and the company is fed up with it? The engineer should do what the spec says. Nothing more, ever. He can certainly talk to management about the spec and offer suggestions, perhaps adding feature Y is a good idea nobody thought of. But you should never take management out of the loop because even if you do an awesome job, you could easily get fired for it.
Just look at the dice. What would you surmise is a "petal" around the "rose"? I guessed the rose must be the 1 dot in the middle of a dice, so any dice that had a 1 dot, you simply count the other dots around it. Whoop-de-friggin do. Perhaps I have a knack for seeing outside the box, I don't know, but it wasn't a brain teaser at all. And I just took a wild guess.
Huh? Having an officially blessed version of Linux that is buyable buy corporate users advances OSS by leaps and bounds. It means there are COMPANIES and want to USE open source products.
Just because you have religious squibbles with a distro means nothing. Try getting a good paying job as a linux admin without knowing Redhat. Good luck.
Redhat is the defacto standard of mainstream (hence profitable and accepted) linux distro's. Like it or not.
What do you think makes a relevant open source player? Someone who DOESN'T get open source products in widespread use in corporate data centers?
That is a stupid comparison. Redhat is hugely responsible for linux, paying many of the core people on many of the projects associated with linux. Dell does not pay MS employees to hack the kernel.
Can you name any other distro's which are on approved vendor lists in most major corporations?
To corporate America at least, Redhat == Linux. Redhat is what you purchase when you go buy "Linux". Redhat provides support for Linux. It is the reason Linux is so well funded and able to grow. Not Mandrake, Gentoo, Suse, Debian, etc. etc.
How can you say they "are totally different even if they share good relations" when they are one and the same for most intents and purposes in big business. You obviously don't use linux in a corporate environment.
It simply cannot be grasped without a proper modelling method, ie. mathematics. (Normal)People most certainly cannot fathom the bizarre complexities of a universe so immensely intricate and complicated. How do you envision in your head the event horizon of a black hole? It makes no logical sense, your mind is not capable of modelling these constructs as you don't have the bits and pieces which make up the model. The maths involved are merely explanations, models. The universe most likely does not conform to our imprecise models of it, but its the only way we can understand it.
The only person I know of in all of modern history who could manipulate severely complex ideas such as evaporating black holes, is Stephen Hawking. Thats only through necessity as he is very limited in his ability to use tools outside of his head.
How in the world would you "3d model" a collapsing star? Most of what is occuring is happening with energy and force, not matter as you know it. You can model what you would visually see, sure, but that tells us nothing other than what it would look like from a spaceship near enough to watch it (over a very long time as well.) Thats like painting a picture of the moon and attempting to understand its geology and magnetic field.
3d modeling is surface only, what your eyes tell you. The concept of physical matter is a concept of how your eyes interpret radiation, how your hand interacts with massive groups of energetic particles, etc. The very world you see around you is an imprecise model itself, in your mind. There is much more going on with a wooden chair then what it looks and feels like to your sensory input devices. We have to use tools to more precisely describe these things. In essense, mathematics is just a language used to explain things that can't be explained with pictures.
At these scales, "things" become meaningless. Its just points of force and energy wiggling near each other. There would simply be "nothing" in the "tube" in a photon (remember its just an artists representation).
What is there between two oxygen molecules in the near void of space?
These things aren't made of anything. They are parts of an equation. We don't even know that they exist in any real sense, we can only infer their existence through crude macro scale experimentation. That experimentation leads us to theories which adequately explain what it was that we saw in our experiment.
Even if we somehow created something "smaller" (these words are not really useful here) its not really a thing at all, of any size. Its a reaction, a vibration, something more along those lines.
Ever simplifying? You mean like trying to make Active Directory replication work on a sizeable WAN? Or understand why age-old SMTP commands were changed with Exchange so that tried-and-true PIX filters can't work with it? Or do you mean the ever-incredible-maddening patch-management testing and rollout and testing that takes an entire team to do at a large corporation. Or, perhaps you mean the some 10s of 1000s of malware progs that have come out just this year -- heck, this month -- and that must be fought and battled daily....
I think you are confusing crap with complexity, but whatever... Battling malware? On all my systems its automated. I run daily updates in linux, rarely having to deal with it. In windows it works automatically as well, with even less involvement. Contrast that to the days of floppy boot sector virii replicating like crazy, with crappy anti virus software just coming out and no real way to clean everything except wipe it all. I haven't had a virus or malware infection in many many years.
The reason it takes a large corporation a huge team to roll out software is poor management and stupid people. I know, I have run these large teams for very large roll outs (10,000+ seats). Try doing a massive software roll out in 1988. Now imagine updating a massive system in 1978. Today, you have to sit through 50 meetings discussing with idiots about "why is this DLL in the update? Take it out!!" when they are simply justifying their pathetic existance. On the last large IT project team I managed I had 3 people out of 50 who were actually highly knowledgable about their job (I'm a consultant, so I have no control over these people other than at the project level.)
And these guys didn't start using Windows until they were over 50. They've simply not spent their life living with the current, global OS, nor do they feel they have to to run their networks and backbones -- believe it or not, there's more to IT than windows and an ipod.
Certainly. However, these same folks ask a teenager to setup their ipod for them, can't figure out how to store a phone number in a cell phone, etc. Its the inability to do simple stuff like this which, IMO, makes them willing idiots. How in the world is ANYTHING hard to do in windows? When people ask you to install software for them, its a joke. You pop the cd in, and click a few times. Compare that with installing EMACS in some old DEC equipment.
Nothing that the windows kiddos do in IT is highly complex compared to managing old Netware servers, VAX farms, Vines networks, etc. Anybody who CAN do the old school IT management should have no problem with the current crop of crap from microsoft. Google makes every seemingly complex task (complex as in "I don't know how to do it") easy as well. You just need some common sense, intelligence and lose the mindset that you can't do it.
Being a wiz at a telnet prompt with huge backbone equipment should mean that you are a very intelligent, problem solving type of person. Figuring out Exchange should be cake for someone like that, unless they were just doing what they were told to do to solve specific, repeating problems.
When I am 60 this stuff will be even simpler, all I'll have to do to create a new domain and mail setup would be to say "hello computer, make it so."
I simply do not understand the concept that things are getting more and more complex. They are getting better and more powerful, but the complexity is shielded through more and more layers of abstraction.
You know, the inability to use simple tech is what makes the old folks so damn crusty and stupid, IMO. You are telling me, that a guy who can rebuild a telco switch from a telnet prompt, can't point and click in something as simple and dumbed down as windows? He couldn't plug something into a USB port and hit OK?
I have no sympathy for the tech geniuses of the past who can't use the ever simplifying crop of current technology. They are, in fact, not geniuses at all, but glorified car mechanics who have oodles of information on procedures to perform, but no true understanding of technology in the broadest sense.
I am not a kid, nor am I in my 60's, but I'll never be that stupid or clueless about anything. I may not know all the cool shit like the latest ring tones, but I sure as hell know more about cell phones then a 20 year old kidiot, and I will always keep that advantage. When I am 60, you can bet I won't be stymied in the LEAST by the latest OS, gadget, whatever.
Those of us who are in between being true old school and the new kids on the block have the greatest advantage, because we aren't following memorized procedures, nor are we using whatever the latest web fad is, but we understand it all. The old guys are from a generation where technology was marble tower knowledge. The kids just have it it handed to them with easy interfaces. We are the ones who got our hands on a computer at 13 and learned to program. The old foggies never had that because they couldn't buy one, the kids simply have no desire because they are brain dead.
If you can't figure out how to keep your screen from clearning (hint, NOT because of ssh) then what judge are you on the source code?
Ever seen the source code of the commercial SSH? Hmm. Is it even using the proper encryption algorithms? Is there a back door? We are talking heavy duty ENTERPRISE security here. You trust that level of security to a product that claims to protect your communications? Why not trust it to a product you KNOW protects your communications, because you can look right there in the source and then compile it yourself.
The world is full of little 'yous', arguing about how the US is evil because it doesn't do what you think it should and how unfair it all is to everyone else.
I wonder why the world is full these little me's?
Having traveled the globe quite extensively, I can quite assure you, the world is indeed full of these little me's. Quite full.
The Marshall Plan was enacted BECAUSE europe was totally destroyed in the power play between Britain, the US, Germany and the Soviet Union. The US/Britain conquered Germany, divided up europe with the soviets, and then rebuilt the place. So what? Thats what the winners do in war, rebuild their newly found economic sub-states.
Vietnam? What did that conflict have to do with the United States? It was a country trying to wrestle freedom from the French imperialists. I thought the US supported this. Where did you learn your history anyway?
The Korean conflict was a "police action" fronted by the UN in order to allow the US to send troops without a declaration of war, as called for in our constitution. Again, what threat did this war pose to the United States? Who exactly were we helping? The folks we killed, or the folks who shared our economic ideals?
Umm.. The US leads the world in prison population and has for many years:
What "communists" funded the "insurgent rebel groups" in South America? They fought their civil wars with shitty weapons, no funding and little but idealogical support. Fortunately for the US, the fascist despots won most revolutionary wars in south america due to our heavy involvement.
The United States INVENTED nuclear weapons (oh - and used them, btw). China did not. The Russians did not. Something is only invented once you know. Information from the manhatten project filtered into russion hands, which is what fueled their nuke program. China obtained the information in the same way.
Anyway I'm really not interested in arguing this with you. Check out Amnesty International's report on North America:
I've had this same tired argument on the internet for over a decade. Do I dig US foreign policy? No. Do I think we are an admirable nation? No. Do I think the US government is evil? Yes. So, there you go. You're not going to convince me otherwise. So go buy your "support the troops" stickers or whatever, and I'll continue to keep saying "NUKE THE TROOPS."
WTF has the US done for the world other than protect its own interests? I'm not talking about technology, which has nothing to do with the government. I'm talking about the US government's involvement in foreign affairs. List some good things that didn't involve killing people.
The US people are the most complacent, ignorant sheep on the entire planet.
The US was isolationist until the second world war. What has the US done since then? Kill people in vietnam, kill people in korea, kill people in iraq, kill people all over south america, lead the world in prison population per capita, invent nuclear weapons and arm dangerous nations like isreal, etc. etc. The US almost destroyed the friggin PLANET with good old Ronnie and his beef with russia. WTF are you talking about?
What, do you consider "survivor" or "american idol" to be accomplishments?
Who cares, what is your point? That we should not re-elect him? Whatever. IS it any suprise that "insert president name here" is evil? Like we have to be told that.
Stupid fucking sheeple of the US. Now go bomb some more brown people.
Then why don't they make more of these big original movies?
I mean come on, dukes of hazzard? Bad news bears? WTF?
Why does Peter Jackson have to do King Kong instead of some wildly creative, risky, big budget brand new movie?
Sometimes making a book into a movie is a great thing, such as LOTR.
Since when is making a movie out of a lame 70's sitcom a great thing?
Its simple: these are properties that are already owned and established markets, whether in our minds or in merchandise. They just want to milk it some more rather then risk a new franchise not making it. If we just keep rehashing popular culture over and over, we end up exactly where we are - the worst time in history for new creative works. There is nothing redeeming right now about the movie industry, and its probably our own fault for buying all this shit.
Perhaps we want something better than king kong, and something ORIGINAL! The guy who originally made king kong made an original movie. Why can't Peter Jackson make an original big budget monstor movie?
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely that sounds like fun! Do you enjoy cookie cutter recipes for defeating monsters? Thats just rote bullshit, boring as hell. What if the enemy actually thought about things, changed its strategy, etc.? What if the big boss changed his minions around, moved them to better spots, changed the order in which you see them, etc? Man, that would be awesome. Guess what bro - "fun" is not guaranteed kills. That is boring as shit. Fun is the fear of death, strategizing, running away going "WTF!!!" and having to completely rethink the encounter. I would love that. As it is, these encounters are lame, boring and simply following the recipe for victory.
Since when is "fun" equated with completely linear known results from repetitive activity?
Thats why I hate listening to folks whine about twinks in WoW. Because its not "fun" to lose. Just think of those guys are really smart bosses, and good luck. I would love to be able to finally defeat a super smart, devious, powerful boss. Victory should be hard fought and truly be an accomplishment. Not "gather this many buffs, sneak in here, shoot that guy, wait 5 seconds, hit him with 10 of this, switch to the other guy walking by (wait 3 secs to shoot him) blah blah blah blah." BORING.
Frigging twitchy kids. You have no sense of accomplishment, just a sense of entitlement to "fun." You whine and complain that things are "hard" and not fun for you. I just don't understand how a known outcome of a known sequence of events is fun in any fucking way. Of course, I have a fully functional brain that hasn't been spoon fed "accomplishment" because I am breathing and somehow entitled to it.
Actually, as I read it, it was collusion between DuPont chemical and Hearst. Hearst published the yellow press which got "marihuana" banned before anybody knew they were banning hemp. DuPont had recently been awarded several patents on the sulfuric acid process used to break down tree fiber to be usable as paper, as well as the invention of Nylon. It meant huge sales for DuPont, and also protected Hearsts vast forest lands as a source of income.
Hemp had in the previous decades become a very viable source of newsprint paper as a new process had also been invented to make it much easier to break down hemp fiber for paper use. The owner of the wood fiber process obviously won out. The hemp process was a machine kinda like a cotton gin. Not a lot of renewable profits for the owner unlike the chemical process of DuPonts.
The DuPont patented process meant huge profits for them in licensing and chemicals. The hemp technique was mechanical and would have seriously cut into their new profit stream.
Really it was all about paper and rope. I am surely not exact in my knowledge so take this with a grain of salt, but I did read the Emporer Wears No Clothes some years ago and it was enlightening. The great thing about the book is half of it is actual photocopy of the public record evidence. The newpaper articles, the legislation, transcripts from congressional hearings, all of it is right there to support the conspiracy theory. At the end the conclusion is pretty clear.
Hey dont preach your shit here, you are just a dumbass addict. 12-step programs are, obviously, bullshit. Why dont you just stop using? Have a bit of a self control problem? 12 step "programs" are scams designed to bilk you of, most usually, lots of money going to "treatment". Fuck off you drug war zombie propaganda machine.
Hasn't the Foresight Institute been doing this for many years?
http://www.foresight.org/
Interesting article though. I dig reading about nanotech, its the coolest sci-fi-ish tech thats just around teh corner somewhere.
Usually this crap book is sent around by the PHB's as a preemptive strike against layoffs down the line.
It basically tells you that it is a good thing to get fired and you are a pussy if you don't want to get fired. I once worked for a corporation that bought crates of these books, gave one to every employee during "training" and then layed off a third of the company at the end of the quarter.
"What would you do if you weren't afraid?"
Two chicks at the same time.
Yeah great for Code Complete.
The reality is, engineers are notoriously horrible at initial estimates. Ego, depth of understanding, many things can contribute to a poor estimate. The more complex a solution is, the harder it is to estimate. Especially DURING a meeting laying out a project. I have made that were completely accurate, and those massive ones that were an order of magnitude wrong. Those always take a lot of time to break the problem down, in fact in those projects we charge the customer just to estimate time/complexity and give them a quote, as it takes quite a bit of fact finding to really suss out the details.
Making the customer happy is a business decision. It is not up to an engineer to make such a decision on his own. How does he know this customer hasn't played games with developers for a long time and the company is fed up with it? The engineer should do what the spec says. Nothing more, ever. He can certainly talk to management about the spec and offer suggestions, perhaps adding feature Y is a good idea nobody thought of. But you should never take management out of the loop because even if you do an awesome job, you could easily get fired for it.
That took me exactly 30 seconds to figure out.
That is the dumbest puzzle I have ever seen.
Just look at the dice. What would you surmise is a "petal" around the "rose"? I guessed the rose must be the 1 dot in the middle of a dice, so any dice that had a 1 dot, you simply count the other dots around it. Whoop-de-friggin do. Perhaps I have a knack for seeing outside the box, I don't know, but it wasn't a brain teaser at all. And I just took a wild guess.
Bill Gates must be a genius.
Huh? Having an officially blessed version of Linux that is buyable buy corporate users advances OSS by leaps and bounds. It means there are COMPANIES and want to USE open source products.
Just because you have religious squibbles with a distro means nothing. Try getting a good paying job as a linux admin without knowing Redhat. Good luck.
Redhat is the defacto standard of mainstream (hence profitable and accepted) linux distro's. Like it or not.
What do you think makes a relevant open source player? Someone who DOESN'T get open source products in widespread use in corporate data centers?
That is a stupid comparison. Redhat is hugely responsible for linux, paying many of the core people on many of the projects associated with linux. Dell does not pay MS employees to hack the kernel.
Can you name any other distro's which are on approved vendor lists in most major corporations?
To corporate America at least, Redhat == Linux. Redhat is what you purchase when you go buy "Linux". Redhat provides support for Linux. It is the reason Linux is so well funded and able to grow. Not Mandrake, Gentoo, Suse, Debian, etc. etc.
How can you say they "are totally different even if they share good relations" when they are one and the same for most intents and purposes in big business. You obviously don't use linux in a corporate environment.
It simply cannot be grasped without a proper modelling method, ie. mathematics. (Normal)People most certainly cannot fathom the bizarre complexities of a universe so immensely intricate and complicated. How do you envision in your head the event horizon of a black hole? It makes no logical sense, your mind is not capable of modelling these constructs as you don't have the bits and pieces which make up the model. The maths involved are merely explanations, models. The universe most likely does not conform to our imprecise models of it, but its the only way we can understand it.
The only person I know of in all of modern history who could manipulate severely complex ideas such as evaporating black holes, is Stephen Hawking. Thats only through necessity as he is very limited in his ability to use tools outside of his head.
How in the world would you "3d model" a collapsing star? Most of what is occuring is happening with energy and force, not matter as you know it. You can model what you would visually see, sure, but that tells us nothing other than what it would look like from a spaceship near enough to watch it (over a very long time as well.) Thats like painting a picture of the moon and attempting to understand its geology and magnetic field.
3d modeling is surface only, what your eyes tell you. The concept of physical matter is a concept of how your eyes interpret radiation, how your hand interacts with massive groups of energetic particles, etc. The very world you see around you is an imprecise model itself, in your mind. There is much more going on with a wooden chair then what it looks and feels like to your sensory input devices. We have to use tools to more precisely describe these things. In essense, mathematics is just a language used to explain things that can't be explained with pictures.
What is there between an electron and a neutron?
At these scales, "things" become meaningless. Its just points of force and energy wiggling near each other. There would simply be "nothing" in the "tube" in a photon (remember its just an artists representation).
What is there between two oxygen molecules in the near void of space?
These things aren't made of anything. They are parts of an equation. We don't even know that they exist in any real sense, we can only infer their existence through crude macro scale experimentation. That experimentation leads us to theories which adequately explain what it was that we saw in our experiment.
Even if we somehow created something "smaller" (these words are not really useful here) its not really a thing at all, of any size. Its a reaction, a vibration, something more along those lines.
I think you are confusing crap with complexity, but whatever... Battling malware? On all my systems its automated. I run daily updates in linux, rarely having to deal with it. In windows it works automatically as well, with even less involvement. Contrast that to the days of floppy boot sector virii replicating like crazy, with crappy anti virus software just coming out and no real way to clean everything except wipe it all. I haven't had a virus or malware infection in many many years.
The reason it takes a large corporation a huge team to roll out software is poor management and stupid people. I know, I have run these large teams for very large roll outs (10,000+ seats). Try doing a massive software roll out in 1988. Now imagine updating a massive system in 1978. Today, you have to sit through 50 meetings discussing with idiots about "why is this DLL in the update? Take it out!!" when they are simply justifying their pathetic existance. On the last large IT project team I managed I had 3 people out of 50 who were actually highly knowledgable about their job (I'm a consultant, so I have no control over these people other than at the project level.)
Certainly. However, these same folks ask a teenager to setup their ipod for them, can't figure out how to store a phone number in a cell phone, etc. Its the inability to do simple stuff like this which, IMO, makes them willing idiots. How in the world is ANYTHING hard to do in windows? When people ask you to install software for them, its a joke. You pop the cd in, and click a few times. Compare that with installing EMACS in some old DEC equipment.
Nothing that the windows kiddos do in IT is highly complex compared to managing old Netware servers, VAX farms, Vines networks, etc. Anybody who CAN do the old school IT management should have no problem with the current crop of crap from microsoft. Google makes every seemingly complex task (complex as in "I don't know how to do it") easy as well. You just need some common sense, intelligence and lose the mindset that you can't do it.
Being a wiz at a telnet prompt with huge backbone equipment should mean that you are a very intelligent, problem solving type of person. Figuring out Exchange should be cake for someone like that, unless they were just doing what they were told to do to solve specific, repeating problems.
When I am 60 this stuff will be even simpler, all I'll have to do to create a new domain and mail setup would be to say "hello computer, make it so."
I simply do not understand the concept that things are getting more and more complex. They are getting better and more powerful, but the complexity is shielded through more and more layers of abstraction.
You know, the inability to use simple tech is what makes the old folks so damn crusty and stupid, IMO. You are telling me, that a guy who can rebuild a telco switch from a telnet prompt, can't point and click in something as simple and dumbed down as windows? He couldn't plug something into a USB port and hit OK?
I have no sympathy for the tech geniuses of the past who can't use the ever simplifying crop of current technology. They are, in fact, not geniuses at all, but glorified car mechanics who have oodles of information on procedures to perform, but no true understanding of technology in the broadest sense.
I am not a kid, nor am I in my 60's, but I'll never be that stupid or clueless about anything. I may not know all the cool shit like the latest ring tones, but I sure as hell know more about cell phones then a 20 year old kidiot, and I will always keep that advantage. When I am 60, you can bet I won't be stymied in the LEAST by the latest OS, gadget, whatever.
Those of us who are in between being true old school and the new kids on the block have the greatest advantage, because we aren't following memorized procedures, nor are we using whatever the latest web fad is, but we understand it all. The old guys are from a generation where technology was marble tower knowledge. The kids just have it it handed to them with easy interfaces. We are the ones who got our hands on a computer at 13 and learned to program. The old foggies never had that because they couldn't buy one, the kids simply have no desire because they are brain dead.
What a dumbass.
If you can't figure out how to keep your screen from clearning (hint, NOT because of ssh) then what judge are you on the source code?
Ever seen the source code of the commercial SSH? Hmm. Is it even using the proper encryption algorithms? Is there a back door? We are talking heavy duty ENTERPRISE security here. You trust that level of security to a product that claims to protect your communications? Why not trust it to a product you KNOW protects your communications, because you can look right there in the source and then compile it yourself.
The world is full of little 'yous', arguing about how the US is evil because it doesn't do what you think it should and how unfair it all is to everyone else.
I wonder why the world is full these little me's?
Having traveled the globe quite extensively, I can quite assure you, the world is indeed full of these little me's. Quite full.
Definition of Complacent: Contented to a fault; self-satisfied and unconcerned: He had become complacent after years of success.
i ghest_to_lowest_rates.html
US involvement with broad international affairs was not really active until after WWII.
http://www.answers.com/topic/isolationism
The Marshall Plan was enacted BECAUSE europe was totally destroyed in the power play between Britain, the US, Germany and the Soviet Union. The US/Britain conquered Germany, divided up europe with the soviets, and then rebuilt the place. So what? Thats what the winners do in war, rebuild their newly found economic sub-states.
Vietnam? What did that conflict have to do with the United States? It was a country trying to wrestle freedom from the French imperialists. I thought the US supported this. Where did you learn your history anyway?
The Korean conflict was a "police action" fronted by the UN in order to allow the US to send troops without a declaration of war, as called for in our constitution. Again, what threat did this war pose to the United States? Who exactly were we helping? The folks we killed, or the folks who shared our economic ideals?
Umm.. The US leads the world in prison population and has for many years:
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/rel/icps/worldbrief/h
What "communists" funded the "insurgent rebel groups" in South America? They fought their civil wars with shitty weapons, no funding and little but idealogical support. Fortunately for the US, the fascist despots won most revolutionary wars in south america due to our heavy involvement.
The United States INVENTED nuclear weapons (oh - and used them, btw). China did not. The Russians did not. Something is only invented once you know. Information from the manhatten project filtered into russion hands, which is what fueled their nuke program. China obtained the information in the same way.
Anyway I'm really not interested in arguing this with you. Check out Amnesty International's report on North America:
http://web.amnesty.org/report2005/2am-index-eng
I've had this same tired argument on the internet for over a decade. Do I dig US foreign policy? No. Do I think we are an admirable nation? No. Do I think the US government is evil? Yes. So, there you go. You're not going to convince me otherwise. So go buy your "support the troops" stickers or whatever, and I'll continue to keep saying "NUKE THE TROOPS."
I was born and raised in california, FYI.
I, therefor, am just as guilty as the next guy for the state of our country.
WTF has the US done for the world other than protect its own interests? I'm not talking about technology, which has nothing to do with the government. I'm talking about the US government's involvement in foreign affairs. List some good things that didn't involve killing people.
The US people are the most complacent, ignorant sheep on the entire planet.
The US was isolationist until the second world war. What has the US done since then? Kill people in vietnam, kill people in korea, kill people in iraq, kill people all over south america, lead the world in prison population per capita, invent nuclear weapons and arm dangerous nations like isreal, etc. etc. The US almost destroyed the friggin PLANET with good old Ronnie and his beef with russia. WTF are you talking about?
What, do you consider "survivor" or "american idol" to be accomplishments?
Who cares, what is your point? That we should not re-elect him? Whatever. IS it any suprise that "insert president name here" is evil? Like we have to be told that.
Stupid fucking sheeple of the US. Now go bomb some more brown people.
Then why don't they make more of these big original movies?
I mean come on, dukes of hazzard? Bad news bears? WTF?
Why does Peter Jackson have to do King Kong instead of some wildly creative, risky, big budget brand new movie?
Sometimes making a book into a movie is a great thing, such as LOTR.
Since when is making a movie out of a lame 70's sitcom a great thing?
Its simple: these are properties that are already owned and established markets, whether in our minds or in merchandise. They just want to milk it some more rather then risk a new franchise not making it. If we just keep rehashing popular culture over and over, we end up exactly where we are - the worst time in history for new creative works. There is nothing redeeming right now about the movie industry, and its probably our own fault for buying all this shit.
Oh. So you have to be part of the industry to know when something SUCKS? Fuck that. Fuck your stupid movie and fuck hollywood.
I have a big problem with fake ass wannabe movie makers telling us we have no right to say hollywood sucks. Get a real job.
Perhaps we want something better than king kong, and something ORIGINAL! The guy who originally made king kong made an original movie. Why can't Peter Jackson make an original big budget monstor movie?
Your friend should get the DVD quality version of ep3 thats available all over. Its from an actual dvd source from pre-production.