Well, my name is not Arabic, but I am very ethnic-looking. Also, I went to Beirut a few years ago. Needless to say, I get the full treatment every time I fly, but I guess that it doesn't bother me that much. In a way it makes me feel safer. Incidentally, the worst going over I ever had was in DeGaul Airport in Paris.
I certainly respect your point-of-view and I'm sure that you disagree, but my *opinion* is that sometimes survival means giving up *some* freedoms. As far as I know, that has happened in every war ever. If these terrorists didn't have the means and the motivation to kill millions of us, I would probably be a little less inclined to be such a sheep:).
Historically speaking, yes, but by itself your comment is most insipid and speaks volumes about your limited knowledge and perspective.
Probably about as much as your affected writing style says about you being a pseudo-intellectual. It was probably the whole "...most insipid and speaks volumes..." cliché that did it. Hint: people who are really smart don't need to *try* to sound smart--just try to be yourself when you write.
In previous times, information was severely limited to the public, whereas today, there is very little excuse not to have some idea of what is actually transpiring. All wars principally benefit the rich elites, the successful wannabes, and their political lackeys.
I pretty much agree with that but I'm not sure what it has to do with what I wrote. I wasn't talking about the public; I was talking about three world leaders, who presumably had a little more information.
Let me guess! You were modded up by your posting buddy, right?
Ummm...no, it's called a Karma-Bonus Modifier. But nice try.
I'm not exactly sure why you decided get so nasty and personal, after all, I didn't make presumptions about you or your intellect when I originally posted. Maybe a little less coffee would be a good idea.
[When an individual kills a person, he is called a murderer. When an individual kills, maims or tortures over one hundred thousand people, he is called George W. Bush.]
Or FDR, or Winston Churchill, or Abraham Lincoln, or any other leader who led a country during a war.
Feedback by irrationalBuyer: ITEM OKAY...BUT SLOW SHIPING
Reply by haplessSeller: Auction ended 8-17, paid 8-24, shipped 8-24
Follow-up by irrationalBuyer: YEAH, BUT IT STIL TOOK OVER 1 WK--SLOW SHIPING!!!!!!
Seems like a better system to me. But, if the feedback doesn't post until after both parties have left feedback, what is my incentive to leave feedback? Why should I risk it? I have pleanty of feedback already and a 99.9% positive. Maybe there should be a time limit, at which point neither can leave feedback and any feedback that has been left posts.
Either way, it seems like it would be better than what currently exists.
On another note, I wonder how much the proliferation of craigslist has hurt ebay. I usually try selling large, big-ticket firsy on craigslist to avoid the paypal and seller fees. It usually works.
Sellers have complaints about the feedback system too. For instance, why should the feedback remain on a seller's profile from a buyer who has been booted from ebay for non-payment, fraud, etc?
As a seller, I definitely won't leave feedback until the buyer does. If you leave feedback before they do, some buyers will try to use feedback as a way to blackmail the seller into reducing his price or S&H. In five plus years of selling on ebay, the only two negative feedbacks that I have are from people who *never paid* and were angry that I reported them to ebay in order to get my seller fees back.
Dude (or Dudette), are you new here? Didn't you realize that correcting other people and then feeling superior is what/. is all about. Heck, it's one big "I'm smarter than you" pissing contest.
With the recent release of Einstein's private letters indicating that he was a Mack Daddy
I'm no expert, but I don't think anyone in the "urban culture" uses the term "Mack Daddy" anymore. Probably not for about 15 years. Hint: if you see it used on/. or your friends say it, it's probably not hip anymore. Sorry. It's like my uncle who thinks that he's hip because he says "man" a lot when talking to blacks (which is about once every five years). You know, like, "hey Ken, it's good to meet you man!"
From what I read in July's issue of Bicycling Magazine, recumbents are faster than an equivalent road bike as long as you're going downhill or level. Apparently, they blow on hills. Since the glaciers came through our area some bazillion years ago and left it really hilly, I guess I'll just have to stick with my Bianchi road bike.
I wonder sometimes if AMD's lead over Intel over the past couple years has had any effect on Dell, considering the brand awareness of Intel, very cheap low-end computers by Dell, and inherent conservative-ness of major corporations (read: customers).
When I told a customer that he would probably have to replace his 3-year-old entry-level Dimension because it wasn't enough computer to serve graphic rich files to his entire (18 workstations) network, he stammered, "...but, but, but it's a Dell..." as if by virtue of the fact that it had a "D," a slanted blue "E," and two "L's" it could defy the flippin' laws of physics.
The legal system is primarily designed to make money for the legal
profession. Once litigation is concluded, the lawyers stop receiving money. Read
Bleak House by Charles Dickens and realise that, while certain details have
changed, the general situation remains the same.<br><br>
Unfortunately, I am serious. Many members of Congress are lawyers and they
ensure laws are framed to maximise the profession's profits. Logical reforms
never see the light of day.
Seriously, I know that it's probably *always* been this way, but government
and everything else is just so corrupt...sigh. Why do we ever think that
we could begin to fix this mess? And please, Rush Limbaugh or Air America
sycophants, don't tell me that it's primarily the Republicans or primarily the
Democrats because they're apparently all on the take. Whether it's just
straight $ or merely as voting for a lousy bill solely because it benefits
them or increases their political capital, most of them are crooked and
self-serving. The fact is that the political (read money-driven) system
makes it so that only the corrupt can be elected.
Sorry, probably a down day on my part.
Re:Very true
on
Insider Threat
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
This book reminded me of another good read, "Art of Deception" by Kevin D.
Mitnick. You would be surprised how easy it is to get information from people.
I was working for a large retailer about five years ago when I accidentally
sent the wrong pricing file for a sign-making program to all 105 stores in our
marketing area. So I needed to get into each store's computer via PC
Anywhere and manually change the file. It went something like this:
Mgr or Asst. Mgr.: This is Mr./Mrs./Ms. Manager, how can I help
you?
Me: Hi, I know that you don't know me but this is Joe from
Advertising. I make up the signs and there's an error with next week's
file that I need to fix.
Mgr or Asst. Mgr.: Oh, well we certainly don't need wrong
information on our signs. What do you need me to do?
Me: Right click on Network Neighborhood, double-click the
connection and read me your IP address.
Mgr or Asst. Mgr.: Okay, it's xxx.xxx.x.xxx
Me: Super. I will be in your computer changing some
stuff for a few minutes so don't be alarmed if stuff starts happening on your
screen.
Mgr or Asst. Mgr.: Okay, thanks.
The crazy thing about it is *not one person* in the 105 stores ever
questioned whether I should have that information even though none of them knew
me or could ascertain where I was calling from. Not even close--they all
cheerfully did what I asked without hesitation. Scary!!
I give to the MercyWORKS ministry
at my church because--being entirely volunteer staffed with ZERO overhead--ALL
of the money goes directly to feeding, clothing, providing counseling and
rent/utility bills assistance.
Napoleon Dynamite? I find it hard to believe that this script would have predicted the success of this film.
Also, this actually kind of disgusts me since it seems IMHO that it relies on the same formulaic approach that's responsible for the poor offerings that Hollywood is currently producing.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, my name is not Arabic, but I am very ethnic-looking. Also, I went to Beirut a few years ago. Needless to say, I get the full treatment every time I fly, but I guess that it doesn't bother me that much. In a way it makes me feel safer. Incidentally, the worst going over I ever had was in DeGaul Airport in Paris.
:).
I certainly respect your point-of-view and I'm sure that you disagree, but my *opinion* is that sometimes survival means giving up *some* freedoms. As far as I know, that has happened in every war ever. If these terrorists didn't have the means and the motivation to kill millions of us, I would probably be a little less inclined to be such a sheep
It's "Harry."
I tried it with Firefox, IE and Opera...no dice on any of them. On Opera and Firefox I even allowed cookies from the sites I visited.
Somehow, when I saw the /. blurb for this story, I just knew that there would be at least anti-Bush/Republican post. I just knew it.
Argh. The editing at slashdot plumbs new depths of ineptitude.
It should of course be:
It trawls for names.
You know, I was going to say the same thing but I looked it up to be sure. I was surprised but, here's what I found:
troll1 (trol))
v. trolled, trolling, trolls
v. tr.
"trolling." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 01 Sep. 2006. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=trolling& x=0&y=0 >
Historically speaking, yes, but by itself your comment is most insipid and speaks volumes about your limited knowledge and perspective.
Probably about as much as your affected writing style says about you being a pseudo-intellectual. It was probably the whole "...most insipid and speaks volumes..." cliché that did it. Hint: people who are really smart don't need to *try* to sound smart--just try to be yourself when you write.
In previous times, information was severely limited to the public, whereas today, there is very little excuse not to have some idea of what is actually transpiring. All wars principally benefit the rich elites, the successful wannabes, and their political lackeys.
I pretty much agree with that but I'm not sure what it has to do with what I wrote. I wasn't talking about the public; I was talking about three world leaders, who presumably had a little more information.
Let me guess! You were modded up by your posting buddy, right?
Ummm...no, it's called a Karma-Bonus Modifier. But nice try.
I'm not exactly sure why you decided get so nasty and personal, after all, I didn't make presumptions about you or your intellect when I originally posted. Maybe a little less coffee would be a good idea.
[When an individual kills a person, he is called a murderer. When an individual kills, maims or tortures over one hundred thousand people, he is called George W. Bush.]
Or FDR, or Winston Churchill, or Abraham Lincoln, or any other leader who led a country during a war.
Hopefully, this will take the controversy out of this issue.
Or
Feedback by irrationalBuyer: ITEM OKAY...BUT SLOW SHIPING
Reply by haplessSeller: Auction ended 8-17, paid 8-24, shipped 8-24
Follow-up by irrationalBuyer: YEAH, BUT IT STIL TOOK OVER 1 WK--SLOW SHIPING!!!!!!
Seems like a better system to me. But, if the feedback doesn't post until after both parties have left feedback, what is my incentive to leave feedback? Why should I risk it? I have pleanty of feedback already and a 99.9% positive. Maybe there should be a time limit, at which point neither can leave feedback and any feedback that has been left posts.
Either way, it seems like it would be better than what currently exists.
On another note, I wonder how much the proliferation of craigslist has hurt ebay. I usually try selling large, big-ticket firsy on craigslist to avoid the paypal and seller fees. It usually works.
Sellers have complaints about the feedback system too. For instance, why should the feedback remain on a seller's profile from a buyer who has been booted from ebay for non-payment, fraud, etc?
As a seller, I definitely won't leave feedback until the buyer does. If you leave feedback before they do, some buyers will try to use feedback as a way to blackmail the seller into reducing his price or S&H. In five plus years of selling on ebay, the only two negative feedbacks that I have are from people who *never paid* and were angry that I reported them to ebay in order to get my seller fees back.
Isn't it funny how those overtime hours that employers *need* us to work so badly dry up when they have to start paying for them.
Might I suggest Chimay Blue http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bi%C3%A8res_de_Chimay ?
Dude (or Dudette), are you new here? Didn't you realize that correcting other people and then feeling superior is what /. is all about. Heck, it's one big "I'm smarter than you" pissing contest.
Haha owned.
Supposed to be "pwn3d"
With the recent release of Einstein's private letters indicating that he was a Mack Daddy
/. or your friends say it, it's probably not hip anymore. Sorry. It's like my uncle who thinks that he's hip because he says "man" a lot when talking to blacks (which is about once every five years). You know, like, "hey Ken, it's good to meet you man!"
I'm no expert, but I don't think anyone in the "urban culture" uses the term "Mack Daddy" anymore. Probably not for about 15 years. Hint: if you see it used on
From what I read in July's issue of Bicycling Magazine, recumbents are faster than an equivalent road bike as long as you're going downhill or level. Apparently, they blow on hills. Since the glaciers came through our area some bazillion years ago and left it really hilly, I guess I'll just have to stick with my Bianchi road bike.
Lose is the opposite of win or find.
Loose is the opposite of tight.
Loose could also be a verb (as in he will loose the hounds) but I can't think of an antonym.
Of course, I'd be just as happy if Google pounded Paypal into the dirt.
As much as my gut reaction is to agree, I think that having two (at least) major players would be better and perhaps lower costs for their services.
I wonder sometimes if AMD's lead over Intel over the past couple years has had any effect on Dell, considering the brand awareness of Intel, very cheap low-end computers by Dell, and inherent conservative-ness of major corporations (read: customers).
When I told a customer that he would probably have to replace his 3-year-old entry-level Dimension because it wasn't enough computer to serve graphic rich files to his entire (18 workstations) network, he stammered, "...but, but, but it's a Dell..." as if by virtue of the fact that it had a "D," a slanted blue "E," and two "L's" it could defy the flippin' laws of physics.
Arghhhh...is the end near yet?
I gotta say that was one of the funniest posts I've encountered. Your definitely a clever one--if slightly warped:)
The legal system is primarily designed to make money for the legal profession. Once litigation is concluded, the lawyers stop receiving money. Read Bleak House by Charles Dickens and realise that, while certain details have changed, the general situation remains the same.<br><br>
Unfortunately, I am serious. Many members of Congress are lawyers and they ensure laws are framed to maximise the profession's profits. Logical reforms never see the light of day.
http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/mems.asp
Seriously, I know that it's probably *always* been this way, but government and everything else is just so corrupt...sigh. Why do we ever think that we could begin to fix this mess? And please, Rush Limbaugh or Air America sycophants, don't tell me that it's primarily the Republicans or primarily the Democrats because they're apparently all on the take. Whether it's just straight $ or merely as voting for a lousy bill solely because it benefits them or increases their political capital, most of them are crooked and self-serving. The fact is that the political (read money-driven) system makes it so that only the corrupt can be elected.
Sorry, probably a down day on my part.
This book reminded me of another good read, "Art of Deception" by Kevin D. Mitnick. You would be surprised how easy it is to get information from people.
I was working for a large retailer about five years ago when I accidentally sent the wrong pricing file for a sign-making program to all 105 stores in our marketing area. So I needed to get into each store's computer via PC Anywhere and manually change the file. It went something like this:
Mgr or Asst. Mgr.: This is Mr./Mrs./Ms. Manager, how can I help you?
Me: Hi, I know that you don't know me but this is Joe from Advertising. I make up the signs and there's an error with next week's file that I need to fix.
Mgr or Asst. Mgr.: Oh, well we certainly don't need wrong information on our signs. What do you need me to do?
Me: Right click on Network Neighborhood, double-click the connection and read me your IP address.
Mgr or Asst. Mgr.: Okay, it's xxx.xxx.x.xxx
Me: Super. I will be in your computer changing some stuff for a few minutes so don't be alarmed if stuff starts happening on your screen.
Mgr or Asst. Mgr.: Okay, thanks.
The crazy thing about it is *not one person* in the 105 stores ever questioned whether I should have that information even though none of them knew me or could ascertain where I was calling from. Not even close--they all cheerfully did what I asked without hesitation. Scary!!
I give to the MercyWORKS ministry at my church because--being entirely volunteer staffed with ZERO overhead--ALL of the money goes directly to feeding, clothing, providing counseling and rent/utility bills assistance.
Napoleon Dynamite? I find it hard to believe that this script would have predicted the success of this film.
Also, this actually kind of disgusts me since it seems IMHO that it relies on the same formulaic approach that's responsible for the poor offerings that Hollywood is currently producing.