He is definitely guilty. He did the things with which they're accusing him. The punishment of that crime is straightforward.
However, I think he is a patriot and should be lauded for his efforts. When he did it, he knew that this was what he risked. He obviously felt that it was worth it to provide such a tremendous service to his country. I applaud him and consider him a national hero for making such a sacrifice for me and everyone else. I would like to think I would do the same, but without being placed in that situation, I obviously can't say for sure. He can. His moral character was tested and he passed with flying colors.
This is the way things should/need to work. If there weren't consequences, we'd have all sorts of deluded people releasing classified documents (that they - possibly errantly - felt needed to be released) because they thought they'd just be allowed to go on their way (the world needs to know that we use slightly too weak of bolts on our drones, so here are the plans to prove it!).
The best possible timeline for this type of situation in my opinion: 1. He releases documents and is exposed as doing so 2. He is arrested and tried for the crime 3. He is found guilty and sentenced 4. If the public good that came from the action is so dramatic as to warrant it, he should receive a pardon (but that doesn't mean he shouldn't have been found guilty to begin with).
Of course, I won't hold my breath for the pardon, though. Politicians are too concerned with appearances to risk being "soft" on "terrorism" (everything bad is "terrorism", don't you know).
I salute you Bradley Manning. Serve your sentence with pride.
Certainly, intriguing, but not "dead ringer proof". It could also be that fraternal twins are more likely to be tested for autism if their twin is diagnosed than a non-twin sibling. You have to keep in mind that those statistics aren't giving chances of _having_ autism. Instead, they're giving changes for being _diagnosed_ with autism.
Yes, you were opposing certain code review comments, not opposing having code reviews. Which is what the conversation is about.
Of course you don't have to blindly make every change that comes up in a code review. That's almost as bad as having no code review. You have a conversation with the person who made the comments and provide a compelling argument on why they should complete the code review without those changes being made.
There are Tomato branches that support 802.11n (and Linux 2.6-based kernels). The linksysinfo.org forums are performing maintenance at the moment, so I can't give you a link. However, checkout the Tomato sub-forum, and it is a stickied thread.
Why would anyone on either side have the least fear of having the other side presented [in Science class]?
I fear that it will produce people (eg, you) that confuse science and philosophy. They are very different subjects and shouldn't be conflated.
The fact that I believe that the currently presiding Theory of Evolution more accurately explains the observational fact that evolution exists has no bearing on that.
Even if Intelligent Design (Creationism) is 100% accurate, it should be taught in a philosophy course (I took a philosophy of religion course in college and rather enjoyed it). When you start presenting unscientific ideas as science, you begin on a path that results in nothing but people unable to produce (or even discern) logical ideas.
I think that is a very rational reason for "fear" of this type of thing.
Of course, the "just works" in the fourth paragraph should be another "it works". I feel I should make that clear since the term "just works" has been taken over, too.
I suggest you go read the article again.
It wasn't 2 people for and 2 people against. They reached a consensus that 2 of the comments had been satisfactorily resolved and that 2 of the comments hadn't been satisfactorily resolved. They then couldn't come to a consensus on whether the remaining 8 comments were resolved. The 80% number was the number of people that were not satisfied enough to vote yes. They had agreed that 2 of their comments were not satisfactorily resolved. Which way the remaining 8 comments fell could only increase this number. Roughly 80% of those present didn't want to vote yes. The final change to yes came down to one man, who seems to have had his mind made up ahead of time.
Ah, but then you have the deaths of innocent people on your hands. If death==guilt then anyone you killed must have deserved it. And, if anyone survives, they are "a bit of a freak" (as you put it), so no one will listen to them anyway.
Recently, I went to this party, and when the band left, I grabbed the mic and started singing (I was imbibed). I've not been invited back.... Man, that must have been one hell of a party. I don't think I've ever seen anybody drink enough for the alcohol to completely dissolve them and, subsequently, be comsumed by somebody else!
I use a Hauppauge WinTV PVR USB2 for capture, and the built in headphone jack and S-Video output (nVidia Geforce4 Go, I believe) for output. I currently use GB-PVR on Windows since the Linux driver for this capture card only recently became complete enough for my use, and I really have very few complaints.
Slashdot Mirror
He is definitely guilty. He did the things with which they're accusing him. The punishment of that crime is straightforward.
However, I think he is a patriot and should be lauded for his efforts. When he did it, he knew that this was what he risked. He obviously felt that it was worth it to provide such a tremendous service to his country. I applaud him and consider him a national hero for making such a sacrifice for me and everyone else. I would like to think I would do the same, but without being placed in that situation, I obviously can't say for sure. He can. His moral character was tested and he passed with flying colors.
This is the way things should/need to work. If there weren't consequences, we'd have all sorts of deluded people releasing classified documents (that they - possibly errantly - felt needed to be released) because they thought they'd just be allowed to go on their way (the world needs to know that we use slightly too weak of bolts on our drones, so here are the plans to prove it!).
The best possible timeline for this type of situation in my opinion:
1. He releases documents and is exposed as doing so
2. He is arrested and tried for the crime
3. He is found guilty and sentenced
4. If the public good that came from the action is so dramatic as to warrant it, he should receive a pardon (but that doesn't mean he shouldn't have been found guilty to begin with).
Of course, I won't hold my breath for the pardon, though. Politicians are too concerned with appearances to risk being "soft" on "terrorism" (everything bad is "terrorism", don't you know).
I salute you Bradley Manning. Serve your sentence with pride.
FYI: Net Applications =/= NetApp (formerly known as Network Appliance)
Certainly, intriguing, but not "dead ringer proof". It could also be that fraternal twins are more likely to be tested for autism if their twin is diagnosed than a non-twin sibling. You have to keep in mind that those statistics aren't giving chances of _having_ autism. Instead, they're giving changes for being _diagnosed_ with autism.
Yes, you were opposing certain code review comments, not opposing having code reviews. Which is what the conversation is about.
Of course you don't have to blindly make every change that comes up in a code review. That's almost as bad as having no code review. You have a conversation with the person who made the comments and provide a compelling argument on why they should complete the code review without those changes being made.
Replace "cows" with "corporations".
Sounds like a great idea. Should make working at a slaughterhouse more appealing.
And thus, Torgo's Executive Powder was born...
There are Tomato branches that support 802.11n (and Linux 2.6-based kernels). The linksysinfo.org forums are performing maintenance at the moment, so I can't give you a link. However, checkout the Tomato sub-forum, and it is a stickied thread.
Kansas statute 8-1508 disagrees with you (emphasis obviously mine):
I had wondered about this for a long time, glad I was finally triggered to look it up.
Why would anyone on either side have the least fear of having the other side presented [in Science class]?
I fear that it will produce people (eg, you) that confuse science and philosophy. They are very different subjects and shouldn't be conflated.
The fact that I believe that the currently presiding Theory of Evolution more accurately explains the observational fact that evolution exists has no bearing on that.
Even if Intelligent Design (Creationism) is 100% accurate, it should be taught in a philosophy course (I took a philosophy of religion course in college and rather enjoyed it). When you start presenting unscientific ideas as science, you begin on a path that results in nothing but people unable to produce (or even discern) logical ideas.
I think that is a very rational reason for "fear" of this type of thing.
And the gorillas will take care of the snakes...
The best part: when wintertime rolls around, the gorillas simply freeze to death.
I'm not overweight either (had never been), I weigh 75kg, at 1.78cm tall. So that's pretty ok.
I hate to break it to you, but 75kg is extremely overweight for someone 1.78 cm tall.
The GP post made the mistake that 16=0xF. The parent post corrected that. I don't see how that is a fail...
is the bastard offspring of the union of the hexdecimal and the decimal, literally 0xF*10
fixed that for you
Are you joking?
0x10*10...
Jaunty Jackalope may be the poofiest name for an Ubuntu release yet
That is probably why that isn't the name of the release...
Just plain wrong.
A fact is a fact, regardless of whether or not it is true. The opposite of fact is opinion, not falsehood.
Just plain wrong.
A fact is a fact, regardless of whether or not it is true. The opposite of fact is opinion, not falsehood.
H ow c a n the people k n ow s o little about ho w S t arbucks j oined the CIA, the Ma f ia, and the K nights Templar to take out JFK?
But JFK shot first...
Grrr, preview, preview, preview...
Heroes
Of course, the "just works" in the fourth paragraph should be another "it works". I feel I should make that clear since the term "just works" has been taken over, too.
I see you are still on my lawn...
Not like MySQL cared about data integrity in the past. . . whay start now?!
Gaaah! Data corruption!
Your post must have been stored in MySQL...
Why would you need a programmer to change people's pay in the system?
Oh, wait; you don't. This is just more politics...
I suggest you go read the article again.
It wasn't 2 people for and 2 people against. They reached a consensus that 2 of the comments had been satisfactorily resolved and that 2 of the comments hadn't been satisfactorily resolved. They then couldn't come to a consensus on whether the remaining 8 comments were resolved. The 80% number was the number of people that were not satisfied enough to vote yes.
They had agreed that 2 of their comments were not satisfactorily resolved. Which way the remaining 8 comments fell could only increase this number. Roughly 80% of those present didn't want to vote yes.
The final change to yes came down to one man, who seems to have had his mind made up ahead of time.
Ah, but then you have the deaths of innocent people on your hands. If death==guilt then anyone you killed must have deserved it. And, if anyone survives, they are "a bit of a freak" (as you put it), so no one will listen to them anyway.
What, you expect truth to trump convenience?
I use a Hauppauge WinTV PVR USB2 for capture, and the built in headphone jack and S-Video output (nVidia Geforce4 Go, I believe) for output. I currently use GB-PVR on Windows since the Linux driver for this capture card only recently became complete enough for my use, and I really have very few complaints.