Religious/non-religious does not make a lot of difference... but a religious authority does! God trumps your mom, dad and government... and the priest who just told you to shut up about the abuse is a direct representative of god. This little detail and the fact that those priest eagerly forgive themselves or even make it 'right' by claiming that that little bit of evil is OK because of all the good they can do because of it is just sickening (not only with sexual abuse, but also like mother Theresa who let unfortunate people suffer so she herself could be closer to god).
In my experience any man who claims to have a more direct line to god (or the supernatural) than you should be avoided at any cost. I'm certain that if there would be no religious leaders there would be almost no problems with religion...
As the gay marriage discussion has shown there will be hordes of opposing zealots who don't want their concept of marriage tainted... Why would it be any different for this 'unholy heathen change' to religious marriage-code that might destroy both the religious pillars of marriage and celibacy?
We *know* this is a rational idea, so we can assume the church won't.
Oh yeah, and good point about the non-inheritance. But this holds for most doctrine... contrary to what I originally thought (and most people just assume) religion is shaped more by politics than anything even remotely religious. Most 'religious conflicts' are just political in nature with religion thrown in the mix to really get people bat-shit crazy and willing to do anything. So religion is actually a tool (a strong one) to better establish your political power.
I resent the accusation! Welders are some of the finest people there are, they have truly seen the light, and no matter what pressure they are under they always manage to keep it together.
I think you are confusing a conservatism with a particular american political association (i'm not very familiar with terms in this context, so please elaborate). But by definition 'conservative' has nothing to do with 'being who you want to be', but quite the opposite: avoiding change and limiting yourself to traditional ways that worked before to attain some form of stability. This manifests mainly by resisting rapid change (often the faster or bigger the change the more resistance).
Especially social conservatism creates the biggest resistance against all rapid change of inter-human relations (more info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservatism). So i'd classify anti-gay conservatism under the social (or perhaps cultural) conservatism.
Of course the conservative christians have their separate issues with homosexuality, but that just makes it a double whammy... There are christians that don't mind gay people getting married (not too much I'm afraid). But there are *no* conservatives - by definition - that don't mind big changes. Conservatives will always resist and fear social changes, and this has nothing to do with 'hurting people in the process', the perceived threats are merely psychological in origin.
Well, you have this engine that works... but it's still mechanical so no step forward really... but I guess a turbine is more reliable for scaling up...
Really? You're questioning some Kb used on a very useful library that is a basic cross-browser requirement for good scripting. In this day and age where broadband is available to anyone...
I'm currently developing a webapp which is quite heavy in scripting, css and images (for the user interface). To get to the login page you need to download more than 500Kb, which might be a lot for any random static page but not for a large complex webapp. It is worth adding the proper caching headers so all subsequent pageloads are small and fast since all the script/css/images are loaded already... Oh yeah and I use the webapp over mobile internet, you won't even notice any speed hit. I use my mobile internet to demonstrate the webapp to my boss in fact.
That's good, it should not be a problem for the end user, it should be a problem for the ISPs and companies like Google. Let them fix it and let me post my email address so I can be contacted *and* read my mail without spam. Besides the ISPs have to most to gain from eradicating SPAM, and are the only parties with means to fix it.
It's generally only conservative people (and not necessarily all Christians) that are strongly outspoken against homosexuality, hence the hypocrisy is in the conservatives part when they practice homosexual acts in secret...
You wrongfully assume that being Christian has anything to do with morality, but in real life you are just as likely to get screwed over or helped by a Christian as any other man, we're still all human with human flaws and qualities after all. The reason why the keyword "Christian" is significant in the context of a hypocritical act is the correlation between deep faith and hypocrisy. Presumably this is because of the psychological effect of cognitive dissonance caused by being confronted with conflicting facts and beliefs (like seeing the T-Rex skeleton of 65 million year old and still believing that the earth is 6000 years old). If you continue to lie to yourself to uphold your beliefs on a massive scale (everyone does this regularly, but religion forces you to do this much more) you create the perfect situation to become a complete hypocrite.
Everyone is always so amazed when an outspoken anti-gay conservative Christian comes out of the closet, but I always think 'It was bound to happen'. When a person *is* a homosexual and thinks he is bad because of it and will even go to hell if he does practice homosexual acts it's quite a natural thing to vent this self-loathing and fear by attacking the very thing he himself is... It's all natural and understandable with basic psychological insights.
A friend of me lives in Germany in a small village in the shadow of a nuclear power plant. They actually live with the thing in their back yard and could not be happier! The power plant provides the town with some good income they invest in the local economy and infrastructure. People are actually moving *to* the town instead of away as with many small rural towns.
I've visited the power plant and they have a special visitor center where you can learn all about the specific processes used, from mining the fissionables to storing the waste in huge steel containers. But the best part about the exhibit is the cloud chamber, you can see all kinds of different radiation particles in the box of about 1 square meter (really awesome!). It really emphasized the fact that absolutely *no* radiation leaks from the reactor, the only trails you could see were random in all directions. In fact the kind gentlemen who showed us around told us that every single coal plant exhausts more radioactive radiation in one day than a nuclear power plant in a year!
I can also honestly say that I want nuclear power and I want it in my own backyard. Sadly nuclear is still on the decline here, mostly because people are very misinformed by the eco-mafia... If they knew that the alternative (coal realistically) is so much worse for the environment and health of locals (and that modern nuclear is completely different from Chernobyl) they would not protest. So I guess the only way is to properly inform people (so good move by E-On with their visitor center).
Isn't HTTP(S) highly asymmetric in bandwidth usage? If they drop all HTTP(S) connections which use more than a certain factor of upstream they could prevent most VPN connections...
Not likely to be used for P2P, but in the realm of possibilities. I would not be surprised if all the content providers they found are just proxies, legit or pwned.
Yeah, they can just as easy mess with OpenDNS... I recently 'fixed' an internet problem for a friend at his work by setting up OpenDNS but it appears they now resorted to blocking OpenDNS! He had no choice but to reset the DNS server (or learn all IPs).;-)
I love OpenDNS, it's very useful, but I agree it's not the answer to everything...
I've found that UPC in the Netherlands throttled torrents (other traffic is faster). Encrypting traffic does nothing (I guess they filter based on data volume per connection/port whatever). But I also use a VPN connection to work to securely move files of several gigabytes, and these connections were also noticeably slower... I guess this is a side-effect of the throttling, but I don't think they detect encryption but a more simple bandwidth detection.
NOTE TO SELF: just got the idea of creating a VPN connection to port 21/80, perhaps they are exempt, I'll try that out later...
But your mechanism of speeding up traffic (torrent/ftp/svn) over VPN does in fact work (I bypass the corporate firewall that slows things down by VPNin into another work location to get good speeds). Strangely even my ping times to google are improved over the VPN! But that might be because the other location has a pretty sweet fibre up-link.
Comparing apples and oranges there... ActiveX was a mechanism that can try to install software without you wanting it, only having to click a deceptive 'Yes' in a dialog. You have no further control after that what that ActiveX control does, you could be totally owned by a drive-by-download, it has shown to be a huge vulnerability in practice. It can't be compared to the normal operation of installing software from CD/DVD/floppy/USB-stick/flash/downloads by choice.
The marketplace can better be compared with just downloading and installing software from a trusted website like SourceForge. With some added automation that even warns you of the functionality used by the app in question. I'd say it's even a step forward by adding the automation and warning. I want all my platforms to be able to download and install any software I want... It works on all versions of Linux (binary/src), Windows (exe/msi), Windows Mobile (exe/cab), Android (dex/apk)... and no kludge of a system like ActiveX is needed. Oh yeah and I have a Windows Mobile phone, and in my experience there is plenty of pretty good software available from all over the web that can easily be installed. The the pre-marketplace mobile generation of systems works just fine, developers that are serious can publish software without too much of a hassle.
I think the marketplace can be a great step forward by giving users *more* control, not by limiting them!
Perhaps it's cultural, the USA is or course a land of opposites, where opinions are often divided around the 50% mark... But cultural or not I can't stand it when one group of people thinks that the way they like it should be put in law for all others. America has some strange issues with 'obscenity'. I can remember enough uproars over something like a nipple, and people demand action after that... There is a list (non-exhaustive) of some incidents at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States, and a specific example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nipplegate.
It's no problem if people protest against certain things (the cultural part), but politicians shouldn't just listen to the people with the biggest mouths.
In The Netherlands they broadcast the movie 'Deep throat' on public TV a year back, and there was some protest from christian political parties. Despite their efforts they could not prevent the movie from being broadcast... Even politicians can't censor the public TV here!
Americans often see their country as the epitome of freedom, but when you have an outside perspective from a place with a different idea of freedom it kind of puts it in perspective.
But seriously, the USA is a fairly free society, almost as much as here in The Netherlands. But that does not mean that this right is something that should be taken for granted... What I meant is there are always factors eroding this right, it seems natural for people to agree with free speech, but it's also in most people's nature to think that the one special thing they find extremely offensive should be the exception. By doing nothing the right to free speech should naturally (and slowly, so not very obviously) disappear unless vigilantly guarded by either the government or the people.
In my opinion there are already too many exceptions... but even one is too many. An example from some European countries is the law against denying the holocaust. I understand the reasons for this law because it was a well known horrible thing and people are denying it out of anti-Semitic background, moreover the countries where this is illegal were closely related to these events in WW2... so it's all very understandable. But still I stand by my opinion that no matter how horrible the things may be that people say it should not matter what they say, you can choose to ignore it. This may be hard especially for Jewish people, but I guess that they won't want to listen to the right-extremist neo-nazi's that spread this anyway. A law is overkill and is a violation of the right to free speech.
In fact this can also be deemed illegal in The Netherlands, but only in the context of clear discrimination and spreading hate against a group of people. The Dutch lifestyle (or Amsterdam perhaps) can pretty much be summed up in 'live and let live', so you can say pretty much anything but you can't threaten or oppress a group. The neo-nazi's can spread all kind of lies about the Jewish people/history, and normal people choose just to ignore this... but there is a line where inciting hate and violence (especially in a group) can and will be punished.
People will always find a definate reason to (unwittingly) erode free speech, and this one is about saving the children so most logic goes out the window.
I understand bullying is a big problem, and steps need to be taken to prevent it. But is the only solution to make a law against it? And do people really believe these laws will make a difference? Bullying is something that can be solved in school, or at home. If you use 'bad' words it is the job of your parents or teacher to set the line, the government should have no say in the way you verbally interact with your peers. In my opinion the most the government should be able to do is require public schools to have an active project to combat bullying, and let the school handle this internally (with detention or whatever works in that particular school). This also won't fix the problem completely, but at the very least no less than any law could.
And another problem with creating a law is that you need a hard line... where will it be? You can't tell them to 'go kill themselves', but can you say something like 'you would be happier if they would be dead'? Or even 'go to hell'? Or can you still say something more positive like 'if you commit suicide you will hurt the people that love you'?
Slashdot Mirror
Nah, 4 Tb would be 454.7 Gb.
Religious/non-religious does not make a lot of difference... but a religious authority does! God trumps your mom, dad and government... and the priest who just told you to shut up about the abuse is a direct representative of god. This little detail and the fact that those priest eagerly forgive themselves or even make it 'right' by claiming that that little bit of evil is OK because of all the good they can do because of it is just sickening (not only with sexual abuse, but also like mother Theresa who let unfortunate people suffer so she herself could be closer to god).
In my experience any man who claims to have a more direct line to god (or the supernatural) than you should be avoided at any cost. I'm certain that if there would be no religious leaders there would be almost no problems with religion...
In other words, the writing's on the wall, but the situation is celibate.
As the gay marriage discussion has shown there will be hordes of opposing zealots who don't want their concept of marriage tainted... Why would it be any different for this 'unholy heathen change' to religious marriage-code that might destroy both the religious pillars of marriage and celibacy?
We *know* this is a rational idea, so we can assume the church won't.
Oh yeah, and good point about the non-inheritance. But this holds for most doctrine... contrary to what I originally thought (and most people just assume) religion is shaped more by politics than anything even remotely religious. Most 'religious conflicts' are just political in nature with religion thrown in the mix to really get people bat-shit crazy and willing to do anything. So religion is actually a tool (a strong one) to better establish your political power.
Priests looking to Facebook as part of a campain to attract young people.
I resent the accusation! Welders are some of the finest people there are, they have truly seen the light, and no matter what pressure they are under they always manage to keep it together.
You might want to tell that to some Christians... they still live^H^H^H^H preach by the old testament on a weekly basis.
I think you are confusing a conservatism with a particular american political association (i'm not very familiar with terms in this context, so please elaborate). But by definition 'conservative' has nothing to do with 'being who you want to be', but quite the opposite: avoiding change and limiting yourself to traditional ways that worked before to attain some form of stability. This manifests mainly by resisting rapid change (often the faster or bigger the change the more resistance).
Especially social conservatism creates the biggest resistance against all rapid change of inter-human relations (more info here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_conservatism). So i'd classify anti-gay conservatism under the social (or perhaps cultural) conservatism.
Of course the conservative christians have their separate issues with homosexuality, but that just makes it a double whammy... There are christians that don't mind gay people getting married (not too much I'm afraid). But there are *no* conservatives - by definition - that don't mind big changes. Conservatives will always resist and fear social changes, and this has nothing to do with 'hurting people in the process', the perceived threats are merely psychological in origin.
Well, you have this engine that works... but it's still mechanical so no step forward really... but I guess a turbine is more reliable for scaling up...
Really? You're questioning some Kb used on a very useful library that is a basic cross-browser requirement for good scripting. In this day and age where broadband is available to anyone...
I'm currently developing a webapp which is quite heavy in scripting, css and images (for the user interface). To get to the login page you need to download more than 500Kb, which might be a lot for any random static page but not for a large complex webapp. It is worth adding the proper caching headers so all subsequent pageloads are small and fast since all the script/css/images are loaded already... Oh yeah and I use the webapp over mobile internet, you won't even notice any speed hit. I use my mobile internet to demonstrate the webapp to my boss in fact.
That's good, it should not be a problem for the end user, it should be a problem for the ISPs and companies like Google. Let them fix it and let me post my email address so I can be contacted *and* read my mail without spam. Besides the ISPs have to most to gain from eradicating SPAM, and are the only parties with means to fix it.
It's generally only conservative people (and not necessarily all Christians) that are strongly outspoken against homosexuality, hence the hypocrisy is in the conservatives part when they practice homosexual acts in secret...
You wrongfully assume that being Christian has anything to do with morality, but in real life you are just as likely to get screwed over or helped by a Christian as any other man, we're still all human with human flaws and qualities after all.
The reason why the keyword "Christian" is significant in the context of a hypocritical act is the correlation between deep faith and hypocrisy. Presumably this is because of the psychological effect of cognitive dissonance caused by being confronted with conflicting facts and beliefs (like seeing the T-Rex skeleton of 65 million year old and still believing that the earth is 6000 years old). If you continue to lie to yourself to uphold your beliefs on a massive scale (everyone does this regularly, but religion forces you to do this much more) you create the perfect situation to become a complete hypocrite.
Everyone is always so amazed when an outspoken anti-gay conservative Christian comes out of the closet, but I always think 'It was bound to happen'. When a person *is* a homosexual and thinks he is bad because of it and will even go to hell if he does practice homosexual acts it's quite a natural thing to vent this self-loathing and fear by attacking the very thing he himself is... It's all natural and understandable with basic psychological insights.
A friend of me lives in Germany in a small village in the shadow of a nuclear power plant. They actually live with the thing in their back yard and could not be happier! The power plant provides the town with some good income they invest in the local economy and infrastructure. People are actually moving *to* the town instead of away as with many small rural towns.
I've visited the power plant and they have a special visitor center where you can learn all about the specific processes used, from mining the fissionables to storing the waste in huge steel containers. But the best part about the exhibit is the cloud chamber, you can see all kinds of different radiation particles in the box of about 1 square meter (really awesome!). It really emphasized the fact that absolutely *no* radiation leaks from the reactor, the only trails you could see were random in all directions. In fact the kind gentlemen who showed us around told us that every single coal plant exhausts more radioactive radiation in one day than a nuclear power plant in a year!
I can also honestly say that I want nuclear power and I want it in my own backyard. Sadly nuclear is still on the decline here, mostly because people are very misinformed by the eco-mafia... If they knew that the alternative (coal realistically) is so much worse for the environment and health of locals (and that modern nuclear is completely different from Chernobyl) they would not protest. So I guess the only way is to properly inform people (so good move by E-On with their visitor center).
Isn't HTTP(S) highly asymmetric in bandwidth usage? If they drop all HTTP(S) connections which use more than a certain factor of upstream they could prevent most VPN connections...
Method for spoofing an IP: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SYN_flood
Method for preventing original IP from connecting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SYN_flood
Proof of concept code ARP + SYN: http://perl-code.blogspot.com/2008/04/arp-poison-syn-flood-with-random.html
Real life example of ARP spoofing on comprised servers: http://isc.sans.org/diary.html?storyid=6001
Not likely to be used for P2P, but in the realm of possibilities. I would not be surprised if all the content providers they found are just proxies, legit or pwned.
Yeah, they can just as easy mess with OpenDNS... I recently 'fixed' an internet problem for a friend at his work by setting up OpenDNS but it appears they now resorted to blocking OpenDNS! He had no choice but to reset the DNS server (or learn all IPs). ;-)
I love OpenDNS, it's very useful, but I agree it's not the answer to everything...
I've found that UPC in the Netherlands throttled torrents (other traffic is faster). Encrypting traffic does nothing (I guess they filter based on data volume per connection/port whatever). But I also use a VPN connection to work to securely move files of several gigabytes, and these connections were also noticeably slower... I guess this is a side-effect of the throttling, but I don't think they detect encryption but a more simple bandwidth detection.
NOTE TO SELF: just got the idea of creating a VPN connection to port 21/80, perhaps they are exempt, I'll try that out later...
But your mechanism of speeding up traffic (torrent/ftp/svn) over VPN does in fact work (I bypass the corporate firewall that slows things down by VPNin into another work location to get good speeds). Strangely even my ping times to google are improved over the VPN! But that might be because the other location has a pretty sweet fibre up-link.
Psssst, ahead warning: word down the wire is: Get rid of hackus.
:)
I guess you were right, the powers that be are afraid of Chaneg.
Comparing apples and oranges there... ActiveX was a mechanism that can try to install software without you wanting it, only having to click a deceptive 'Yes' in a dialog. You have no further control after that what that ActiveX control does, you could be totally owned by a drive-by-download, it has shown to be a huge vulnerability in practice. It can't be compared to the normal operation of installing software from CD/DVD/floppy/USB-stick/flash/downloads by choice.
The marketplace can better be compared with just downloading and installing software from a trusted website like SourceForge. With some added automation that even warns you of the functionality used by the app in question. I'd say it's even a step forward by adding the automation and warning. I want all my platforms to be able to download and install any software I want... It works on all versions of Linux (binary/src), Windows (exe/msi), Windows Mobile (exe/cab), Android (dex/apk)... and no kludge of a system like ActiveX is needed. Oh yeah and I have a Windows Mobile phone, and in my experience there is plenty of pretty good software available from all over the web that can easily be installed. The the pre-marketplace mobile generation of systems works just fine, developers that are serious can publish software without too much of a hassle.
I think the marketplace can be a great step forward by giving users *more* control, not by limiting them!
http://www.last.fm/music/Costanza/_/Just+Another+Alien
;)
You're 'welcome'
My gut instinct tells me Kane is behind this, or was it Yuri? Looks like a weapon used by a supervillain or terrorists anyway.
What makes you believe the stripping sexy models weren't already infected to begin with? ...
Perhaps it's cultural, the USA is or course a land of opposites, where opinions are often divided around the 50% mark... But cultural or not I can't stand it when one group of people thinks that the way they like it should be put in law for all others. America has some strange issues with 'obscenity'. I can remember enough uproars over something like a nipple, and people demand action after that... There is a list (non-exhaustive) of some incidents at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_States, and a specific example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nipplegate.
It's no problem if people protest against certain things (the cultural part), but politicians shouldn't just listen to the people with the biggest mouths.
In The Netherlands they broadcast the movie 'Deep throat' on public TV a year back, and there was some protest from christian political parties. Despite their efforts they could not prevent the movie from being broadcast... Even politicians can't censor the public TV here!
Americans often see their country as the epitome of freedom, but when you have an outside perspective from a place with a different idea of freedom it kind of puts it in perspective.
Except perhaps 4chan... ;)
But seriously, the USA is a fairly free society, almost as much as here in The Netherlands. But that does not mean that this right is something that should be taken for granted... What I meant is there are always factors eroding this right, it seems natural for people to agree with free speech, but it's also in most people's nature to think that the one special thing they find extremely offensive should be the exception. By doing nothing the right to free speech should naturally (and slowly, so not very obviously) disappear unless vigilantly guarded by either the government or the people.
In my opinion there are already too many exceptions... but even one is too many. An example from some European countries is the law against denying the holocaust. I understand the reasons for this law because it was a well known horrible thing and people are denying it out of anti-Semitic background, moreover the countries where this is illegal were closely related to these events in WW2... so it's all very understandable. But still I stand by my opinion that no matter how horrible the things may be that people say it should not matter what they say, you can choose to ignore it. This may be hard especially for Jewish people, but I guess that they won't want to listen to the right-extremist neo-nazi's that spread this anyway. A law is overkill and is a violation of the right to free speech.
In fact this can also be deemed illegal in The Netherlands, but only in the context of clear discrimination and spreading hate against a group of people. The Dutch lifestyle (or Amsterdam perhaps) can pretty much be summed up in 'live and let live', so you can say pretty much anything but you can't threaten or oppress a group. The neo-nazi's can spread all kind of lies about the Jewish people/history, and normal people choose just to ignore this... but there is a line where inciting hate and violence (especially in a group) can and will be punished.
People will always find a definate reason to (unwittingly) erode free speech, and this one is about saving the children so most logic goes out the window.
I understand bullying is a big problem, and steps need to be taken to prevent it. But is the only solution to make a law against it? And do people really believe these laws will make a difference? Bullying is something that can be solved in school, or at home. If you use 'bad' words it is the job of your parents or teacher to set the line, the government should have no say in the way you verbally interact with your peers. In my opinion the most the government should be able to do is require public schools to have an active project to combat bullying, and let the school handle this internally (with detention or whatever works in that particular school). This also won't fix the problem completely, but at the very least no less than any law could.
And another problem with creating a law is that you need a hard line... where will it be? You can't tell them to 'go kill themselves', but can you say something like 'you would be happier if they would be dead'? Or even 'go to hell'? Or can you still say something more positive like 'if you commit suicide you will hurt the people that love you'?