My only problem with OSX is that you can only resize the window from one corner. This seriously bugs me, and I see no practical reason for it.
I don't know why, but when I open a certain shared network folder on my iMac, the window is too big for the screen, and I can't resize it because I can't get to that corner! I can't reach the bottom scroll-bar to see what I need to see, so I have to use the arrow keys to move around in the window. And woe betide me if I need a file that's lower than the bottom of my screen. I finally figured out that I could use the little button that goes where Windows puts minimize/maximize/restore to make it fit, but it goes back to the huge size Every Time I Open It!!!
Other than that, once I realized the beauty of the 2-button mouse on OSX, I was a changed man. It's beautiful. I wish I could put it on my Windows boxes.
My brother and I are like this, and our wives noted that we like the dinking around with hardware and drivers better than actually using the dang things.
I agree. That's a very profound thought, and I think it's time for all of us to take the high ground in our own right, and not wait for the government to demand that we sacrifice for the war. I think I will start a letter-writing campaign to the men and women over there.
What problem? I read the Slashdot story and the BBC article, and saw nobody having a problem, other than that "He said the US Department of Defense would prefer that his website not have such videos."
It sounds like the Pentagon would "rather they didn't post it," but that's as far as it goes. They have people watching it, but they'd be fools not to watch what people are saying about their activities.
What, exactly, is the problem that you're talking about? Have I misunderstood you?
I got that definition from an argument like the one on this site: .
During the late 1990s, as people debated government control over cryptography, Al Gore proposed a `Trusted Third Party' - a service that would keep a copy of your decryption key safe, just in case you (or the FBI, or the NSA) ever needed it. The name was derided as the sort of marketing exercise that saw the Russian colony of East Germany called the `German Democratic Republic'. But it really does chime with DoD thinking. A Trusted Third Party is a third party that can break your security policy.
OK, I'll give a car analogy. They suck, but are fun.
My '85 Buick Elektra (I still miss him) was a Trusted Transportation Platform. It was what I had. I Trusted it to get me from home to college and around town and back. At 280,000 miles, some would think it unworthy of such trust. I Trusted it.
Now, the real fun begins: The pointing-out of the flaws in the analogy. Bring it on!
(Actually, I love car analogies for 2 reasons: they are fun to make up, and fun to shoot down(even when mine is getting shot down)
If I am clinging to the side of a cliff, I'll take whatever rope I'm thrown. It'll probably be better than holding to the rock, waiting for my strength to give out.
My point was that users like me may someday be using one of these whether I'm happy about it or not. If it comes down to a choice between using a 10-year-old machine and a new one, I may end up using this Trusted stuff. I may not like it, but I'll take it because it's better than trying to get Enemy Territory 4: The Axis Finally Win MLB Temple to work on a machine that can't play it.
Anyway, I still think the rope analogy is way better than a car analogy.
That's my understanding of it. The Army can do what it feels it must do to protect its own security. My fear is, as the submitter wrote, "They are a large-enough volume buyer that this might kickstart an adoption loop."
I saw a show about this. They actually (in the 20s and early 30s) had a couple of working airship aircraft carriers. The big problem was that when they were at sea in a storm, they were disasters waiting to happen. And did happen. They also held fewer than 10 aircraft each, IIRC. The project literally scrapped itself.
You may be talking of a more recent Navy project. I'm off to Google now, as you suggested.
His assailants held what felt like a semi-automatic weapon to the back of Cocker's head
This guy must get held up a whole lot if he can tell the difference between a semi-automatic weapon from a fully-automatic weapon just by the way it feels on the back of his head.
Of course, I guess if it's an automatic pistol, the barrel enclosure might be distinguished from the barrel of a revolver, but still that takes some lucidity in a tense moment to put all that together.
That's bull honkey. People talk all the time about how much Bush sucks, and some go to extremes, even calling for him to be killed. Rallies are held just to inform everybody how much Bush is hated, and the people there feed off each other to increase their hatred. You never hear of any mass round-ups, or even arrests until someone gets hurt.
The erosion of our liberties is a serious issue, and hyperbole like this only blurs the issue further.
The Mac acts as a host operating system, and Windows as a guest but only in appearance, because Apple won't allow OS X to boot on anything else besides TPM. If Apple would allow booting OS X outside of TPM in some circumstances(which is probably never going to happen) you could conceivably do it the other way around - run Mac as a guest OS to Windows.
What if you were to install a hacked copy of OSX on your Mac? Would that allow you to have OSX be the guest? I've not used one of the new Macs, though I have seen a hacked copy of OSX86 on a home-made computer. So I know it's possible on non-Mac machines, but I don't know if Macs are built to somehow prevent this.
I should probably apoligize. I guess it's possible that you intended something different than I read. I have been known to read too much into things. But if you were ragging on MBAs just because the President has one, then wow.
I was just pointing out that our President has an MBA.
Holy Monkey. Wow. I don't know why, but that sounds like the most petty thing I've ever read in my life. Well, probably not the most EVER, but it's been a while.
Almost nobody is capable of getting a graduate degree while sticking it out in a full-time job.
I did it. So did everyone I work with who has a Masters Degree. Of course, schoolteachers have the summers off, and their own little laboratory (their classroom) in which to do all of their homework.
I basically got the degree to get a pay increase, but there have been a lot of other good things that came out of it. I think through my classroom management more clearly and I plan my curriculum better, among other things.
...with a bunch of social engineering thrown in to convince kids that the government knows whats good for them.
Here's an interesting story. When I first started teaching 3rd grade, we had an activity where the students came up with all of the purposes of government. As a class, we filled 2 pages with the purposes of government. These were the students' ideas, and they were all but 3 or 4 about welfare.
"What does the government do for you?"
"Pays my rent, buys me food, helps with bills, buys lunch,..." and so on. It was kind of depressing.
But I guess my point is kind of that the government doesn't need the school system to teach the kids what the government does. Kids aren't dumb, and they see what's before their eyes.
That's interesting. I once heard an argument that went something like this: "God is omni-benevolent, and evil exists, therefore there is no God." If you were to apply that logic to this problem, we would get something like this: "Light is the universal constant, and the speed of light changes, therefore light doesn't exist." It is much more wise, as you seem to imply, to adapt our understandings in light of the new facts.
I think he's waiting for your response to the links between race and violent crime.
I think there may be some middle ground here. If I am a US INS agent, and am looking for illegal immigrants, I would be far more successful if I were to search in a Latino neighborhood than in a white neighborhood.
On the other hand, if I have a friend around whom I am constantly in fear of saying the wrong thing, then I need to be WAY less conscious of his skin color.
A buddy of mine has a theory of prison reorm. He says they should be sentenced to an amount of money, not time. He says once they get to prison, they should live in a world where they must work for everything they get. They want a smoke? They pay for it. They want to watch Days of our Lives? They pay for it. Food costs money. Anyway, they then have to save money up beyond this to pay off their sentence. The victim would get this money.
I'm sure there are problems with this idea, but it does sound better than what we have.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know why, but when I open a certain shared network folder on my iMac, the window is too big for the screen, and I can't resize it because I can't get to that corner! I can't reach the bottom scroll-bar to see what I need to see, so I have to use the arrow keys to move around in the window. And woe betide me if I need a file that's lower than the bottom of my screen. I finally figured out that I could use the little button that goes where Windows puts minimize/maximize/restore to make it fit, but it goes back to the huge size Every Time I Open It!!!
Other than that, once I realized the beauty of the 2-button mouse on OSX, I was a changed man. It's beautiful. I wish I could put it on my Windows boxes.
My brother and I are like this, and our wives noted that we like the dinking around with hardware and drivers better than actually using the dang things.
They were always bad. Your taste has just improved.
Yes, I'm serious.
It sounds like the Pentagon would "rather they didn't post it," but that's as far as it goes. They have people watching it, but they'd be fools not to watch what people are saying about their activities.
What, exactly, is the problem that you're talking about? Have I misunderstood you?
Thank you for that link. That was interesting. I had not read it before, or thought about Sony's rootkit in that light.
My '85 Buick Elektra (I still miss him) was a Trusted Transportation Platform. It was what I had. I Trusted it to get me from home to college and around town and back. At 280,000 miles, some would think it unworthy of such trust. I Trusted it.
Now, the real fun begins: The pointing-out of the flaws in the analogy. Bring it on!
(Actually, I love car analogies for 2 reasons: they are fun to make up, and fun to shoot down(even when mine is getting shot down)
My point was that users like me may someday be using one of these whether I'm happy about it or not. If it comes down to a choice between using a 10-year-old machine and a new one, I may end up using this Trusted stuff. I may not like it, but I'll take it because it's better than trying to get Enemy Territory 4: The Axis Finally Win MLB Temple to work on a machine that can't play it.
Anyway, I still think the rope analogy is way better than a car analogy.
That's my understanding of it. The Army can do what it feels it must do to protect its own security. My fear is, as the submitter wrote, "They are a large-enough volume buyer that this might kickstart an adoption loop."
If I am hanging from a rope over a cliff, I Trust the rope. I "Entrust it with my security" whether or not I find it worthy of that trust.
In my physics class we used pounds(mass). Does that count?
You may be talking of a more recent Navy project. I'm off to Google now, as you suggested.
Of course, I guess if it's an automatic pistol, the barrel enclosure might be distinguished from the barrel of a revolver, but still that takes some lucidity in a tense moment to put all that together.
You thinking they think they invaded Iraq because they were responsible for 9/11 doesn't make you better informed.
The erosion of our liberties is a serious issue, and hyperbole like this only blurs the issue further.
I should probably apoligize. I guess it's possible that you intended something different than I read. I have been known to read too much into things. But if you were ragging on MBAs just because the President has one, then wow.
I did it. So did everyone I work with who has a Masters Degree. Of course, schoolteachers have the summers off, and their own little laboratory (their classroom) in which to do all of their homework.
I basically got the degree to get a pay increase, but there have been a lot of other good things that came out of it. I think through my classroom management more clearly and I plan my curriculum better, among other things.
"What does the government do for you?"
"Pays my rent, buys me food, helps with bills, buys lunch,..." and so on. It was kind of depressing.
But I guess my point is kind of that the government doesn't need the school system to teach the kids what the government does. Kids aren't dumb, and they see what's before their eyes.
That's interesting. I once heard an argument that went something like this: "God is omni-benevolent, and evil exists, therefore there is no God." If you were to apply that logic to this problem, we would get something like this: "Light is the universal constant, and the speed of light changes, therefore light doesn't exist." It is much more wise, as you seem to imply, to adapt our understandings in light of the new facts.
RACIST!!!
I think there may be some middle ground here. If I am a US INS agent, and am looking for illegal immigrants, I would be far more successful if I were to search in a Latino neighborhood than in a white neighborhood.
On the other hand, if I have a friend around whom I am constantly in fear of saying the wrong thing, then I need to be WAY less conscious of his skin color.
I'm sure there are problems with this idea, but it does sound better than what we have.