The opposite position on the left is equally incoherent. A government that's absolutely trusted to confiscate everyone's guns but can't be trusted with information.
You personal gun will never be effective against a nation state, they have tanks.
And it's not really about not trusting the government. Well, indirectly it is... It's about not granting any instruments for abuse.
We've seen stasis in east Germany abuse their power, we've seen the FBI run counter intelligence campaigns against peaceful political movements (civil rights movement to mention one). It happens in all countries, the Danish intelligence service kept illegal records on left wing politicians during the cold war.
In Germany they certainly learned the lesson, they are very careful not to keep records that can be abused. It's a balance, yes.
At the end of the day, guns are more dangerous than unregulated information, which has many non-violent purposes.
Plus law enforcement that's systematically racist,
I was under the impression that it was most of the US exhibits institutionalized racism (not just the law enforcement)...
but for some reason should be empowered to seize guns from peaceful citizens,
I have yet to hear anyone seriously talking about seizing guns... It's surprising to me that the US isn't debating this.
But it's my clear impression that the politicians only talk about restricting access to guy new guns through background checks. You rarely hear anyone talk about restricting the types of guns available, though it seems very sane to forbid things like an AR-15.
Ultimately, yeah someone will discuss getting rid of existing guns, or making it illegal to buy new guns. But that's not the current debate.
including minorities
Looking at history I don't get the impression that the second amendment was successfully enabled african Americans to protect themselves from being lynched...
as if that were "justice"
Regulating certain items whether it's guns, alcohol, drugs, encryption tools or radio active material is not about "justice".
Well, I guess indirectly... it would be unjust to allow companies dump toxic waste in the ocean and kill everybody. So regulation is necessary.
and wouldn't cause violent confrontations.
An out-right ban and attempt to seize all guns would likely get a small number of gun-nuts to go crazy. But you might make up the body-count from the reduction in murders the next year.
Nevertheless, no politicians are talking about seizing guns from anyone. Merely restrict access to new ones, through background checks.
This is all about preventing current military grade weapons used by the federal government being stolen and used. We're not really talking about small time people either, this is likely about organized crime.
I could also imagine police officers would be happy if they didn't have to shoot a kid, just because he got hold of some other officers gun.. In fact ensuring that a gun can't be used against you must be very attractive to police officers...
Especially, if one day, the American public decides that it's not okay for police officers to shoot people at the first sign of conflict.
Explicitly selling vulnerabilities, other than in a bug bounty program, is organized crime.
Adobe certainly has a standing... Considering that all the big corps feel they have standing when researchers publically share and discuss DRM.
There is clearly no "fair use" or "public interest" argument to be made here, quite the opposite.
None needed. The Government is MUCH more trustworthy than private enterprise, you NEVER have to worry about it...
Seriously, 1 million USD stolen by a few employees... That's not so bad. Considering the complexity of such a scam (ie. number of people involved), and the amount of money stolen I would say this is a minor case.
Just saying there are bigger cases of fraud in both the private and public sector... So this isn't a good case for arguing government is bad.
From the summary it seems multiple employees was involved, at which state YES fraud can happen. But the risk is small if multiple trusted employees need be involved.
Who ever heard of homeless children going to high school?
1 out of 30 american children experience homelessness in 2013 (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/17/report-one-in-30-us-children-homeless).
This doesn't mean living on the street, but it's when a family is kicked out of where they live without having anywhere to go... I would imagine it means sleeping in a car or a shelter until you find something..
Children shouldn't experience not knowing where they are going to sleep (nobody should experience that).
FYI; 1 in 30 = 0.03, meaning the US has 10 times as many homeless children, as Germany have homeless people in total...
(Yeah, I'm not sure all these numbers of perfectly comparable, feel free find better ones)
And yes, families homeless families probably more of an issue in eastern Europe. But they are taking serious steps to do something about it.
US certainly has the resources to fix homelessness, but chooses not to do so! Poverty is still an issue, because as a country you've decided not to help the poor.
Far more likely, the poor in the US live in high density highly polluted environments ie inner suburbs where loaded up with lead from traffic jams and those environments remain polluted. This in conjunction with poor diets, dominated by cheap junk food, results in double the impact.
Yeah, poor people in the US, have it far worse than poor people in most other industrialized countries...
Chrome happened... And microsoft started delivering an almost usable browser.
Finally, the marked has grown... There is a lot more people online today. I just saw presentations of how many new users Mozilla got, but also that this didn't really move the market share, because the market is so huge.
What's the purpose when so many people run ad blockers?
It's wasn't ads. And you could easily disable it...
The new tabs page showed tiles, like it does in chrome... Honestly that's great, before it was just a blank page.
The only thing was that when you were a new firefox user and there was no content to display in the tiles, some of the empty ones would be sponsored... Or at least that's how I understood it..
Honestly, Mozilla makes money from the search deal.. Which is just ads in-directly... I'm not sure it's much worse to do it directly. Granted it's a lot of work.
Why should they work to provide the same as StartCom, seriously...
The whole LetsEncrypt thing is about making the internet more secure. In all honesty long lived certificates is not a good idea. Because most CAs have your certs expire once a year, many people don't automate certificate renewal.
But we should, just like we should rotate passwords, etc... (I know it's not the same).
Obviously, LetsEncrypt won't fit in with most existing setups. Hopefully, shared hosting providers will pick it up and integrate it with their admin interface.
An automated solution is obviously better, so if we're going to push HTTPS, why not do the right way. Rather than trying to replace existing CAs with LetsEncrypt (which isn't the goal).
They are completely separate executables. Perhaps under the scenes they use some common UI code, but if so its not anything I ever interact with. So I really don't see what it benefits me, as a user of either or both, that they are under the same umbrella.
Probably some HTML rendering code. JS engine... I suspect thunderbird still uses XUL and other things...
Desktop Linux is fine. You just have to buy a different brand of graphics card.
Intel and only intel... I just spend the morning try to get nvidia working... What a waste of time... And even if you get it working, it's buggy, crashes and freeze all the time...
Buy laptops with intel and only intel graphics, no dual graphics card that's the worst...
And no it's not good, I can't find a laptop with intel graphics and 16G of ram (well, there is Mac book, some sketchy startup, and recently carbon X1 but I can't get international keyboard on the X1 carbon).
I'm not sure the average service cost is that much less when you factor in replacing a $4000 battery pack every 8 to 10 years.
Well, that's a single big expense.. It's not a yearly visit to check oil every year...
Granted I don't know much about cars, but don't eletric cars still need winter tires, aren't there still moving parts that needs oil, etc?
There's no reason a Window Manager should depend on a particular init system. Doing so is a clear sign of bad software architecture.
Modern desktops aren't just window managers... They are increasingly tightly integrated with ever more aspects of your computer, ranging from power management to device discovery, wifi and network. In the future with xdg-app, we'll see package management becoming part of the desktop environment.
A few years ago one of the gnome devs told me that he really wanted gnome to develop an entire distribution, so they could control all the layers of the stack. In his opinion it was the only way to make a proper PC experience. I think there is something to that...
Why should major desktop cater to power users who wants to compose their own desktop, if the linux desktop is to compete with OSX and windows, they need to create a more tightly integrated desktop. And they are working towards this.
Honestly, I think it'll be great! All the ranting against systemd seems unfounded.
One of these days, they are going to find themselves accidently threatening a russian mafia boss, hells angel commander, mexican cartel boss or something to that effect, and they will find themselves very very dead.
buckethead programming. The metaphor is of programming with a bucket over your head so you can't see what you're doing but instead just stagger in random directions until you accidentally bump into something that appears to work... at which point you leave it and stagger your way through the next obstacle that arises.
I love this term and definition... thanks!:)
Also while it is horrible, buckethead programming is sometimes a valid strategy... Need to write some static HTML UI for an internal API and you want to make it look pretty: buckethead programming the HTML, CSS and even some of the JS is a fast cheap and valid approach...
If it's just a quick internal thing, there no reason to spend 2 days learning angular, react.js or some other framework. Just buckethead program that thing and stick your head in the sand.
I agree though that buckethead programming is crazy if you're developing a serious high quality product that needs to be maintained. But many things doesn't have so high standards.
Volvo says it will be liable for any accidents its cars cause.
So will the CEO do hard time if there is a felony car accident? Due to a software fault / sensor error?
If you cause a car accident due to an unforeseen heart attack or medical condition that you had no control over or expectation of, you hopefully won't go to jail:)
Similarly, if one of the wheels fall of the car while driving, and the car is well maintained, regularly serviced, you hopefully won't face criminal charges in the event of a car accident. Nor will your mechanic face charges.
If however, it is proven that your mechanic knowingly didn't do his job and put bad wheels on your car, then yes, maybe there is a criminal charge.
Or if you could be expected to know that wheel was likely to fall off... But you decided to run anyways.
But generally a crime has to have some level of intent or ignorance, to qualify as a crime.
Well, if you are shopping around because a doctor won't prescribe a medication you saw on TV, then you have made your own bed.
Is it reasonable to expect ill people to make rational decisions? (I think it's sane to expect people to be a bit emotional sometimes)
And let's not pretend anyone is unaffected by ads, like it or not you are affected.
R&D costs are 10% and manufacturing is often negligible, so marketing costs (direct and indirect) are nearly 90%.
That's all waste that we are paying for. Marketing doesn't add value to a product. Most countries have figured that out and banned it.
It's not banned because it's a waste of resources, it's banned in most other countries because it's dangerous to manipulate people into thinking drug X, Y and Z will save you.
It's management's fault to not modernize the OS and hardware. They want to save design costs not updating software/hardware, and they get away with it for 25 years or so, but then if something critical fails, this happens... the whole system is shutdown.
If it lives for 25 years with minimal cost, is this really a bad strategy?
When I write software now, I try to aim for it to live 10 years without any maintenance (not always realistic, just an idealistic goal).
Then I deploy it and stick my head in the sand. Most of my systems won't live for 10 years, but if something ends up doing so, is this really a bad strategy?
I think stick your head in the sand and wait 25 years for the system to crash and someone to call you could be a cost efficient strategy:)
(Granted, in the airport industry, you might want to make sure "system crash" != plane falling out of the sky)
Try: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/...
With the screen dimmer extension this is pretty nice: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-...
there is a few glitches with GTK + screen dimmer on linux, but it's way better than anything chrome has to offer which keeps blinking like crazy.
Slashdot Mirror
The installation of extentions from a website is really smart... Before it used to be copy this zip, there, do that, and hope for the best.
The time from extension development to deployment of an extension with the end-users is much lower. I think that's generally good.
The opposite position on the left is equally incoherent. A government that's absolutely trusted to confiscate everyone's guns but can't be trusted with information.
You personal gun will never be effective against a nation state, they have tanks.
And it's not really about not trusting the government. Well, indirectly it is... It's about not granting any instruments for abuse.
We've seen stasis in east Germany abuse their power, we've seen the FBI run counter intelligence campaigns against peaceful political movements (civil rights movement to mention one). It happens in all countries, the Danish intelligence service kept illegal records on left wing politicians during the cold war.
In Germany they certainly learned the lesson, they are very careful not to keep records that can be abused. It's a balance, yes.
At the end of the day, guns are more dangerous than unregulated information, which has many non-violent purposes.
Plus law enforcement that's systematically racist,
I was under the impression that it was most of the US exhibits institutionalized racism (not just the law enforcement)...
but for some reason should be empowered to seize guns from peaceful citizens,
I have yet to hear anyone seriously talking about seizing guns... It's surprising to me that the US isn't debating this. But it's my clear impression that the politicians only talk about restricting access to guy new guns through background checks. You rarely hear anyone talk about restricting the types of guns available, though it seems very sane to forbid things like an AR-15.
Ultimately, yeah someone will discuss getting rid of existing guns, or making it illegal to buy new guns. But that's not the current debate.
including minorities
Looking at history I don't get the impression that the second amendment was successfully enabled african Americans to protect themselves from being lynched...
as if that were "justice"
Regulating certain items whether it's guns, alcohol, drugs, encryption tools or radio active material is not about "justice".
Well, I guess indirectly... it would be unjust to allow companies dump toxic waste in the ocean and kill everybody. So regulation is necessary.
and wouldn't cause violent confrontations.
An out-right ban and attempt to seize all guns would likely get a small number of gun-nuts to go crazy. But you might make up the body-count from the reduction in murders the next year.
Nevertheless, no politicians are talking about seizing guns from anyone. Merely restrict access to new ones, through background checks.
This is all about preventing current military grade weapons used by the federal government being stolen and used. We're not really talking about small time people either, this is likely about organized crime.
I could also imagine police officers would be happy if they didn't have to shoot a kid, just because he got hold of some other officers gun.. In fact ensuring that a gun can't be used against you must be very attractive to police officers...
Especially, if one day, the American public decides that it's not okay for police officers to shoot people at the first sign of conflict.
Explicitly selling vulnerabilities, other than in a bug bounty program, is organized crime.
Adobe certainly has a standing... Considering that all the big corps feel they have standing when researchers publically share and discuss DRM.
There is clearly no "fair use" or "public interest" argument to be made here, quite the opposite.
None needed. The Government is MUCH more trustworthy than private enterprise, you NEVER have to worry about it...
Seriously, 1 million USD stolen by a few employees... That's not so bad. Considering the complexity of such a scam (ie. number of people involved), and the amount of money stolen I would say this is a minor case.
Just saying there are bigger cases of fraud in both the private and public sector... So this isn't a good case for arguing government is bad.
From the summary it seems multiple employees was involved, at which state YES fraud can happen. But the risk is small if multiple trusted employees need be involved.
Who ever heard of homeless children going to high school?
1 out of 30 american children experience homelessness in 2013 (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/nov/17/report-one-in-30-us-children-homeless).
This doesn't mean living on the street, but it's when a family is kicked out of where they live without having anywhere to go... I would imagine it means sleeping in a car or a shelter until you find something..
Children shouldn't experience not knowing where they are going to sleep (nobody should experience that).
There isn't much genuine "poverty" in the US anymore.
US: 1 in 30 children experience homelessness each year, citation: http://new.homelesschildrename...
Denmark: 0.001 % homelessness for the entire population (all ages), source: http://www.sfi.dk/rapportoplys...
Germany: 0.003 % homelessness for the entire population (all ages), source: http://www.dw.com/en/homeless-...
FYI; 1 in 30 = 0.03, meaning the US has 10 times as many homeless children, as Germany have homeless people in total...
(Yeah, I'm not sure all these numbers of perfectly comparable, feel free find better ones)
And yes, families homeless families probably more of an issue in eastern Europe. But they are taking serious steps to do something about it.
US certainly has the resources to fix homelessness, but chooses not to do so! Poverty is still an issue, because as a country you've decided not to help the poor.
Far more likely, the poor in the US live in high density highly polluted environments ie inner suburbs where loaded up with lead from traffic jams and those environments remain polluted. This in conjunction with poor diets, dominated by cheap junk food, results in double the impact.
Yeah, poor people in the US, have it far worse than poor people in most other industrialized countries...
Chrome happened... And microsoft started delivering an almost usable browser.
Finally, the marked has grown... There is a lot more people online today. I just saw presentations of how many new users Mozilla got, but also that this didn't really move the market share, because the market is so huge.
In most countries having CCTV cover public areas is acceptable.
Know a list? There certain is a lot of places where CCTV is heavily restricted.
What's the purpose when so many people run ad blockers?
It's wasn't ads. And you could easily disable it... The new tabs page showed tiles, like it does in chrome... Honestly that's great, before it was just a blank page.
The only thing was that when you were a new firefox user and there was no content to display in the tiles, some of the empty ones would be sponsored... Or at least that's how I understood it..
Honestly, Mozilla makes money from the search deal.. Which is just ads in-directly... I'm not sure it's much worse to do it directly. Granted it's a lot of work.
Why should they work to provide the same as StartCom, seriously...
The whole LetsEncrypt thing is about making the internet more secure. In all honesty long lived certificates is not a good idea. Because most CAs have your certs expire once a year, many people don't automate certificate renewal.
But we should, just like we should rotate passwords, etc... (I know it's not the same).
Obviously, LetsEncrypt won't fit in with most existing setups. Hopefully, shared hosting providers will pick it up and integrate it with their admin interface.
An automated solution is obviously better, so if we're going to push HTTPS, why not do the right way. Rather than trying to replace existing CAs with LetsEncrypt (which isn't the goal).
They are completely separate executables. Perhaps under the scenes they use some common UI code, but if so its not anything I ever interact with. So I really don't see what it benefits me, as a user of either or both, that they are under the same umbrella.
Probably some HTML rendering code. JS engine... I suspect thunderbird still uses XUL and other things...
Why would they bother with Linux at? Especially if they are forced to GPL their code.
They are not... there is so many work arounds it's crazy...
Anyways, they should do it to get more competition on a market they depend on.
Desktop Linux is fine. You just have to buy a different brand of graphics card.
Intel and only intel... I just spend the morning try to get nvidia working... What a waste of time... And even if you get it working, it's buggy, crashes and freeze all the time...
Buy laptops with intel and only intel graphics, no dual graphics card that's the worst...
And no it's not good, I can't find a laptop with intel graphics and 16G of ram (well, there is Mac book, some sketchy startup, and recently carbon X1 but I can't get international keyboard on the X1 carbon).
I'm not sure the average service cost is that much less when you factor in replacing a $4000 battery pack every 8 to 10 years.
Well, that's a single big expense.. It's not a yearly visit to check oil every year...
Granted I don't know much about cars, but don't eletric cars still need winter tires, aren't there still moving parts that needs oil, etc?
There's no reason a Window Manager should depend on a particular init system. Doing so is a clear sign of bad software architecture.
Modern desktops aren't just window managers... They are increasingly tightly integrated with ever more aspects of your computer, ranging from power management to device discovery, wifi and network. In the future with xdg-app, we'll see package management becoming part of the desktop environment.
A few years ago one of the gnome devs told me that he really wanted gnome to develop an entire distribution, so they could control all the layers of the stack. In his opinion it was the only way to make a proper PC experience. I think there is something to that...
Why should major desktop cater to power users who wants to compose their own desktop, if the linux desktop is to compete with OSX and windows, they need to create a more tightly integrated desktop. And they are working towards this.
Honestly, I think it'll be great! All the ranting against systemd seems unfounded.
One of these days, they are going to find themselves accidently threatening a russian mafia boss, hells angel commander, mexican cartel boss or something to that effect, and they will find themselves very very dead.
Get real this isn't a movie...
buckethead programming. The metaphor is of programming with a bucket over your head so you can't see what you're doing but instead just stagger in random directions until you accidentally bump into something that appears to work... at which point you leave it and stagger your way through the next obstacle that arises.
I love this term and definition... thanks! :)
Also while it is horrible, buckethead programming is sometimes a valid strategy... Need to write some static HTML UI for an internal API and you want to make it look pretty: buckethead programming the HTML, CSS and even some of the JS is a fast cheap and valid approach...
If it's just a quick internal thing, there no reason to spend 2 days learning angular, react.js or some other framework. Just buckethead program that thing and stick your head in the sand.
I agree though that buckethead programming is crazy if you're developing a serious high quality product that needs to be maintained. But many things doesn't have so high standards.
For me, I use stack overflow for library related issues, .....
Yeah, or when working with some specification, and for some reason all other implementations does the wrong thing :)
Volvo says it will be liable for any accidents its cars cause.
So will the CEO do hard time if there is a felony car accident? Due to a software fault / sensor error?
If you cause a car accident due to an unforeseen heart attack or medical condition that you had no control over or expectation of, you hopefully won't go to jail :)
Similarly, if one of the wheels fall of the car while driving, and the car is well maintained, regularly serviced, you hopefully won't face criminal charges in the event of a car accident. Nor will your mechanic face charges.
If however, it is proven that your mechanic knowingly didn't do his job and put bad wheels on your car, then yes, maybe there is a criminal charge.
Or if you could be expected to know that wheel was likely to fall off... But you decided to run anyways.
But generally a crime has to have some level of intent or ignorance, to qualify as a crime.
Well, if you are shopping around because a doctor won't prescribe a medication you saw on TV, then you have made your own bed.
Is it reasonable to expect ill people to make rational decisions? (I think it's sane to expect people to be a bit emotional sometimes)
And let's not pretend anyone is unaffected by ads, like it or not you are affected.
R&D costs are 10% and manufacturing is often negligible, so marketing costs (direct and indirect) are nearly 90%.
That's all waste that we are paying for. Marketing doesn't add value to a product. Most countries have figured that out and banned it.
It's not banned because it's a waste of resources, it's banned in most other countries because it's dangerous to manipulate people into thinking drug X, Y and Z will save you.
It's management's fault to not modernize the OS and hardware. They want to save design costs not updating software/hardware, and they get away with it for 25 years or so, but then if something critical fails, this happens... the whole system is shutdown.
If it lives for 25 years with minimal cost, is this really a bad strategy?
:)
When I write software now, I try to aim for it to live 10 years without any maintenance (not always realistic, just an idealistic goal).
Then I deploy it and stick my head in the sand. Most of my systems won't live for 10 years, but if something ends up doing so, is this really a bad strategy?
I think stick your head in the sand and wait 25 years for the system to crash and someone to call you could be a cost efficient strategy
(Granted, in the airport industry, you might want to make sure "system crash" != plane falling out of the sky)
Try: https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/... With the screen dimmer extension this is pretty nice: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-... there is a few glitches with GTK + screen dimmer on linux, but it's way better than anything chrome has to offer which keeps blinking like crazy.