But the fact remains that he did not directly take money from these people. They voluntarily sent the money to him, for whatever reason.
The fact also remains that they need to take responsibility for their actions. They should not have voluntarily sent him money if they were not completely sure that he was in fact their registrar, much as they shouldn't voluntarily put money in his Coke machine if they're not sure it will give them a bottle of Coke.
Notice that the key word is voluntary. That means that the victims themselves should take some responsibility for becoming victimized. They made the mistake of sending him the money when they obviously did not have to.
Not at all. I've actually found most Asian goods to be superior to American goods.
What I was suggesting, however, is that quality is far more important than quantity. An engineer, be them American or Asian, who designs faulty products and structures should not be counted as an "engineer", even if they have a doctorate from some university. Thus a nation should not take pride in churning out some percentage of its population as engineers if those engineers are not qualified.
You're describing a completely different situation. Indeed, to get to the money in the peoples' wallets he would have to forcefully take it from them. That is not what happened in this case. Remember, the people voluntarily sent him the money.
A more apt analogy would be him standing beside a building, with a Coke logo on his chest, pretending to be a pop machine. People would voluntarily put money into his pocket, thinking they'd get a bottle of Coke. Of course, they wouldn't, because he's not really a pop vending machine.
I did read the article, and the post that I replied to. You obviously did not. The previous poster was talking about giving spammers (note: just spammers, not those making arson or death threats) long jail terms.
Look, you're going to have to go back and read the other posts. We can't discuss this matter if you're going to continue to be ignorant of the facts and topics.
Quality is a big factor, too. An engineer who develops crap is basically useless, and far more of a liability than a benefit. Sure, he or she may have a doctorate, but if all they can do is design legal hazards then they're of no use.
I have a relative in a chemical engineering program at a university in Georgia. He was saying that many of the other students studying for their masters and doctorates were not American. I think he quoted about 60% of them as being Asian, Middle Eastern or Indian. That is, people who came directly from such areas to study in America, not Americans of such descent.
Your figure would only be correct if an American PhD is equivalent to an Asian PhD, namely in how easy it is to obtain one.
It is easy enough in the US to obtain a doctorate from a relatively unknown college. I have worked with such people, and they are often quite lacking in the skills that would be expected from people with their supposed background. The quality of an American PhD relative to an Asian one might be quite significant. I haven't worked with anyone who received their PhD in Asia, so I can't say for sure how they compare.
How does the quality of a typical American PhD program compare to that of a typical Asian PhD program? Is the research of a higher quality in America, or in Asia? Is it easier to "buy" your way to such a degree in America, or is it easier in Asia?
Those are perhaps more reasonable reasons to sentence somebody to a significant jail term. Spamming alone often isn't. And the earlier post was talking specifically about spamming as a crime, not about death threats or arson threats.
Often times it is only the stupid who get scammed. Had these people taken the time to investigate the notice they received, then they most likely would not have been defrauded. They should have contacted their registrar to confirm the need for renewal, for instance. If they forgot who their registrar is, then they're just being irresponsible.
You speak of this guy owning up for the threats he made. Perhaps he should. But then again, his victims should own up to their mistakes. It was through their own negligence that they lost money. They willingly and voluntarily sent him the money. It's not like he came and took the money out of their wallets.
You realize that him remaining in jail for the next 60 years will cost far more than £425,000, correct?
They should just offer him the equivalent of £425,000 in today's American dollars. If the value of the dollar keeps falling, by the time he's release he'll perhaps be able to buy himself a loaf of bread.
He's not a "terrorist". His actions were apparently not politically motivated. It sounds like he was just trying to defend his business from those who opposed it.
I know it's trendy these days for political leaders to refer to anyone they don't like as "terrorists", but I think we can maintain a higher standard here and use the word as it should be used.
What kind of harm are you talking about? Consider the main "damage" caused by spam: wasted bandwidth, wasted time, and wasted diskspace. When proper (and fairly easy) precautions are taken, the harm can be mitigated for the most part.
It's quite easy to delete a number of emails to reclaim diskspace, for instance. And there are miles upon miles of dark fiber in many countries, so the bandwidth argument is basically moot. Perhaps the only harm caused is a minor waste of time. However, had proper precautions been taken in the first place, there'd be no need to clean up any mess caused by a spammer.
You talk about sentencing these people to lengthy prison terms for what basically amounts to being a minor annoyance. Should somebody who walks a bit slower than you now be imprisoned? After all, they're probably wasting just as much of your time as a spammer is if you're stuck behind them.
That's just how that particular market works. People may be demanding Powerbooks due to the name, thinking of even the used Powerbooks as being superior to equivalent new iBooks. Hence they'll pay more.
Indeed, there is RPM support. And that's the very problem! It was a decent system in the mid to late 1990s. But we're past that now. Systems like APT, pkgsrc, and others have proven to be far superior. Like it or not, it's time for Red Hat to get with the times, and use a package management system that's more mature and useful.
Because aside from Mac OS X, it's the easiest operating system to use. And ease of use is very important when you're trying to make computing available to basically every child. KDE is a very easy desktop environment to use. It's also very coherent.
Not only that, KDE has superior support for internationalization. That will be a real benefit when getting these laptops to children in Asia and Africa, for instance. Such children may not know English, and thus will need to rely on the excellent translations provided by KDE.
Another thing to consider is how easy APT makes updating packages. Even from the command like it's something a child could do with ease.
It was most likely a failed attempt at an attack against me. I have proven a number of people wrong in the past, and since they cannot combat with discussion, debate and fact, they usually turn to mismoderation.
But my karma remains at Excellent, and they will most likely lose their future moderating abilities when their abuses pass by the metamoderators. Thus I am the victor, yet again.
Red Hat used to be a quality distribution. But we have to go back to the Red Hat 5.x and 6.x days to notice that.
As time has gone on, there have been many improvements that they have failed to adopt. Dropping support for RPM in favour of APT is one such improvement that they didn't make. The whole GCC 2.96 debacle sure didn't help their reputation amongst developers.
Either way, you are correct, Red Hat is not the way to go. Mac OS X, especially free, would have been the best possible choice. Not considering that, Kubuntu would have been the second best option. It'd offer a solid, coherent KDE system, built upon the power of Debian.
Slashdot Mirror
But the fact remains that he did not directly take money from these people. They voluntarily sent the money to him, for whatever reason.
The fact also remains that they need to take responsibility for their actions. They should not have voluntarily sent him money if they were not completely sure that he was in fact their registrar, much as they shouldn't voluntarily put money in his Coke machine if they're not sure it will give them a bottle of Coke.
Notice that the key word is voluntary. That means that the victims themselves should take some responsibility for becoming victimized. They made the mistake of sending him the money when they obviously did not have to.
Not at all. I've actually found most Asian goods to be superior to American goods.
What I was suggesting, however, is that quality is far more important than quantity. An engineer, be them American or Asian, who designs faulty products and structures should not be counted as an "engineer", even if they have a doctorate from some university. Thus a nation should not take pride in churning out some percentage of its population as engineers if those engineers are not qualified.
You're describing a completely different situation. Indeed, to get to the money in the peoples' wallets he would have to forcefully take it from them. That is not what happened in this case. Remember, the people voluntarily sent him the money.
A more apt analogy would be him standing beside a building, with a Coke logo on his chest, pretending to be a pop machine. People would voluntarily put money into his pocket, thinking they'd get a bottle of Coke. Of course, they wouldn't, because he's not really a pop vending machine.
I did read the article, and the post that I replied to. You obviously did not. The previous poster was talking about giving spammers (note: just spammers, not those making arson or death threats) long jail terms.
Look, you're going to have to go back and read the other posts. We can't discuss this matter if you're going to continue to be ignorant of the facts and topics.
Quality is a big factor, too. An engineer who develops crap is basically useless, and far more of a liability than a benefit. Sure, he or she may have a doctorate, but if all they can do is design legal hazards then they're of no use.
I have a relative in a chemical engineering program at a university in Georgia. He was saying that many of the other students studying for their masters and doctorates were not American. I think he quoted about 60% of them as being Asian, Middle Eastern or Indian. That is, people who came directly from such areas to study in America, not Americans of such descent.
Your figure would only be correct if an American PhD is equivalent to an Asian PhD, namely in how easy it is to obtain one.
It is easy enough in the US to obtain a doctorate from a relatively unknown college. I have worked with such people, and they are often quite lacking in the skills that would be expected from people with their supposed background. The quality of an American PhD relative to an Asian one might be quite significant. I haven't worked with anyone who received their PhD in Asia, so I can't say for sure how they compare.
How does the quality of a typical American PhD program compare to that of a typical Asian PhD program? Is the research of a higher quality in America, or in Asia? Is it easier to "buy" your way to such a degree in America, or is it easier in Asia?
Those are perhaps more reasonable reasons to sentence somebody to a significant jail term. Spamming alone often isn't. And the earlier post was talking specifically about spamming as a crime, not about death threats or arson threats.
Often times it is only the stupid who get scammed. Had these people taken the time to investigate the notice they received, then they most likely would not have been defrauded. They should have contacted their registrar to confirm the need for renewal, for instance. If they forgot who their registrar is, then they're just being irresponsible.
You speak of this guy owning up for the threats he made. Perhaps he should. But then again, his victims should own up to their mistakes. It was through their own negligence that they lost money. They willingly and voluntarily sent him the money. It's not like he came and took the money out of their wallets.
You realize that him remaining in jail for the next 60 years will cost far more than £425,000, correct?
They should just offer him the equivalent of £425,000 in today's American dollars. If the value of the dollar keeps falling, by the time he's release he'll perhaps be able to buy himself a loaf of bread.
He's not a "terrorist". His actions were apparently not politically motivated. It sounds like he was just trying to defend his business from those who opposed it.
I know it's trendy these days for political leaders to refer to anyone they don't like as "terrorists", but I think we can maintain a higher standard here and use the word as it should be used.
"Thug" is perhaps a more appropriate term.
Your logic is faulty. There's not necessarily a connection between spammers and "real criminals", even if there is one in this case.
If somebody who violates copyrights on occasion turns around and kills someone, that does not make all copyright violators murderers.
What kind of harm are you talking about? Consider the main "damage" caused by spam: wasted bandwidth, wasted time, and wasted diskspace. When proper (and fairly easy) precautions are taken, the harm can be mitigated for the most part.
It's quite easy to delete a number of emails to reclaim diskspace, for instance. And there are miles upon miles of dark fiber in many countries, so the bandwidth argument is basically moot. Perhaps the only harm caused is a minor waste of time. However, had proper precautions been taken in the first place, there'd be no need to clean up any mess caused by a spammer.
You talk about sentencing these people to lengthy prison terms for what basically amounts to being a minor annoyance. Should somebody who walks a bit slower than you now be imprisoned? After all, they're probably wasting just as much of your time as a spammer is if you're stuck behind them.
Of course a new chip today (or in January, 2006) should be faster than a processor from 2004. It's called progress.
That's just how that particular market works. People may be demanding Powerbooks due to the name, thinking of even the used Powerbooks as being superior to equivalent new iBooks. Hence they'll pay more.
You're missing a break statement after the REQUIRED_FOR_CLIENT and REQUIRED_FOR_SERVER cases, causing a most likely unwanted fallthrough to default.
Public momentum means nothing when you've got billions upon billions of dollars at your disposal.
Indeed, there is RPM support. And that's the very problem! It was a decent system in the mid to late 1990s. But we're past that now. Systems like APT, pkgsrc, and others have proven to be far superior. Like it or not, it's time for Red Hat to get with the times, and use a package management system that's more mature and useful.
Because aside from Mac OS X, it's the easiest operating system to use. And ease of use is very important when you're trying to make computing available to basically every child. KDE is a very easy desktop environment to use. It's also very coherent.
Not only that, KDE has superior support for internationalization. That will be a real benefit when getting these laptops to children in Asia and Africa, for instance. Such children may not know English, and thus will need to rely on the excellent translations provided by KDE.
Another thing to consider is how easy APT makes updating packages. Even from the command like it's something a child could do with ease.
It was most likely a failed attempt at an attack against me. I have proven a number of people wrong in the past, and since they cannot combat with discussion, debate and fact, they usually turn to mismoderation.
But my karma remains at Excellent, and they will most likely lose their future moderating abilities when their abuses pass by the metamoderators. Thus I am the victor, yet again.
Red Hat used to be a quality distribution. But we have to go back to the Red Hat 5.x and 6.x days to notice that.
As time has gone on, there have been many improvements that they have failed to adopt. Dropping support for RPM in favour of APT is one such improvement that they didn't make. The whole GCC 2.96 debacle sure didn't help their reputation amongst developers.
Either way, you are correct, Red Hat is not the way to go. Mac OS X, especially free, would have been the best possible choice. Not considering that, Kubuntu would have been the second best option. It'd offer a solid, coherent KDE system, built upon the power of Debian.
Pardon me, my good sir! Of course I miswrote "comprises".
Who suggested that the various Biblical characters were able to properly follow the Commandments? I sure did not.
What exactly does your predilection for the penis have to do with the original poster not referring to dyslexia?