Putting out a spray of bullets is the tactic of the ignorant or incompetent. One small-calibre bullet placed properly does the job that a thousand rounds sprayed around an area on full auto will not.
A crowd of 500 unarmed people in a public place is an easy target for one guy with a rifle. He can do whatever he wants until someone else arrives to rescue. But scatter 5 guys and gals with small calibre pistols and a little training out there and he will go down. Not saying he wont do some damage first, but he will go down. He wont be shooting fish in a basket until the cops arrive. Which serves the goal of deterrence better than the police do anyway.
The swiss system was actually inspirational to the system that the Constitution envisions, but so is the historic English yeomanry. It was intended to work very much as you describe, except that it is all at a local level. Most of those who fought in the revolutionary war did so in these local militia units. Local militia units bought their own equipment, elected their own officers, and might also function as the local fire department/rescue 911 service. They would only become subject to Federal or State authorities in the event of a proper declaration of war or emergency. This avoids many of the problems that standing armies bring.
It doesnt have to imply conscription, local militias were voluntary institutions, though backed by a societal expectation that every able-bodied male do his part.
I agree with you that is not . Still the reality of politics means that you have compromises. The libertarians want the government out of marriage entirely - even handed and liberty focused. The paleo-conservatives, of course, want what they consider 'common sense' to rule - and that means marriage is a man and a woman and anything else cant be right. The progressives want their idea of 'common sense' to rule and that means what the paleo-cons see (not entirely without justification in my view) as using their tax dollars to teach their children to be gay. And the unfortunate fact is that if libertarians want to get anything done we have to hold our noses and form a coalition with one or the other of those groups, compromise to some degree with them on some of their pet issues, and hope to move them towards truly libertarian positions over time while cooperating on some very urgent matters like ending the wars.
And so that is indeed what is happening. The progressives are emasculated and completely ineffective at this point, with Obama in office continuing Bush's policies they are useless. So we coalition with the paleo-conservatives instead, and that means we wind up associating with some positions we might would rather not, but we also get an opportunity to moderate them somewhat, at least.
Ultimately, you have to keep some perspective. Gay marriage, with all due respect to the gay couples that are directly affected, is still relatively unimportant compared to the wars which are bankrupting the country and costing people their lives.
Linus makes a good point. So do you. And probably, ultimately, it will be a good thing - because of your point.
Still there is a difference between writing drivers for hardware, and writing drivers for virtualisation. We all know their aim in that is ultimately to make it harder to actually run linux on the bare hardware, instead of having to run it under windows only. Embrace, extend, extinguish remember?
Maybe you don't care about some or all of these things.
The only one I care about is the security updates. Performance and memory usage updates? Those would be great, but 3.6 is still a lot leaner and faster than current.
But what benefit is to be gained by going out of our way to provide buggy, slow, [...] software to our users? Do you think most people could even give informed consent to run such a version of Firefox?
I dont know, it seems like organisational suicide to me, what do your bosses think you have to gain from it?
And yes, I know you were referring to the old versions. I am referring to the current ones, however. They may not be old and unsupported, but they are slower and buggier than 3.6, they suffer from massive breakage, and all evidence seems to suggest that is now the trajectory for Mozilla going forward until the end.
Then why do all my firefox installations continue to nag me to update every time you release a minor update mislabelled as a major rev? I have checked that 'do not ask me again' box a dozen times now. Firefox ignores me.
Sorry, the truth isnt nearly as cleancut as either of you want to make it.
It takes up to 4 years assuming constant peak utilisation according to the source you point to. Constant peak utilisation is obviously an extremely unrealistic assumption.
More plausible usage patterns would result in longer times to break even. In practice tropical installations with well chosen location can get close to that. Marginal usage cases may never recoup in that sense at all though. Economically it can still make sense for other reasons, of course, but that is hardly 'green' if that has any meaning other than being a silly codeword for politically correct.
Back decades ago when I was in 5th grade I remember noting the same thing on many tests. There might be three right answers or no right answers, although it's usually not hard to see which answer they are actually looking for. And it wasnt just 5th grade, this goes on into college. Surely I am not the only one that noticed?
You are correct that they require... counter-action. 'Pushback' is a simplistic framing and part of the reason you are less effective than you should be in your efforts. Opposing force with force is wasted effort, the effective tactician meets his opponents strengths with weakness, yielding the battle quickly onto his own strengths, before pushing back. Judo not karate as the saying goes.
Showing respect for tradition is not an endorsement of superstition. That, sir, is preposterous.
If people were rewriting laws based on Sumerian myths or Shakespeare, what would matter would not be assaulting these foundations of our literature and civilisation, but rather the specific errors in the proposed laws, or the general errors in the approach of those who are misusing this literature.
To put it another way, all you do when they propose these laws is issue a response that many people will perceive (and quite understandably) as an assault on the basis of their culture. That's not drawing flies with honey my friend. I can tell them which biblical verses are being misinterpreted and how. Much more effective out here in red-state land.
Saying the Bible contradicts science is as silly as saying that the Gilgamesh epic, or Shakespeare, contradict science. It's just missing the point. Biblical literalists are missing the point, but I am afraid you are as well. The Bible isnt a science textbook, nor is it the direct and literal word of G_d, and you are being just as perverse in insisting on reading it as the former as they are when they insist it be read as the latter.
The bible is simply a book. No particular theological or epistemological viewpoint is inherent to that book.
Some people come to that book with a set viewpoint, expecting the bible to be literal word of G_d with every word true and all that. That certainly is not a view consistent with science, nor is it a view consistent with the bible itself.
Others have other views of the bible may be radically different and not necessarily conflict with science or scientific thinking in any way.
Any term is arbitrary here. Anything linked to the lifespan of the creator is even more arbitrary, since the length of copyright would be different for two works published at the same time, depending on which author died first. It's also dangerous as it has the potential to create motivation for murder where there would otherwise be none.
Here's the thing. You legalise people making derivative works of GPL software, without complying with the license, as long as they wait a reasonable period of time. (I might argue for 3 years not 3 months but certainly shorter than the eternity under US law currrently.) And that in isolation may not be unalloyed good.
But you also repeal the laws that prevent me from immediately reverse engineering the resulting product, and incorporating what I learn back in the GPL product immediately. And all the laws that make it difficult for me to pay someone else to do the job, of course. You legalise an entire new business world. And the GPL would STILL function better than the BSD license ever has. So I could live with that.
Proportional fonts may be generally 'prettier' perhaps but they are certainly not more readable. They destroy plain text formatting which is the quickest, simplest, and most efficient way to format text that isnt actually intended to be printed out or prettified (i.e. email, code, settings files.) Destroying all my formatting and then claiming to have made my texty more readable isnt going to fly.
Slashdot has never been a place I would point someone at looking for a well-formed webpage, but over the years it just keeps getting worse. After the last 'upgrade' the site is completely unusable without blocking the javascript. It really is ridiculous. A tech site should really learn to use HTML and generate webpages.
Hear hear. HTML should be the top priority on the technical side, and then unicode support. So far as the rest, less slashvertisements and more news would be good. This has been the same answer posted to this sort of question consistently for years. And no one ever seems to listen.
However, the fact that groups have been oppressed or disenfranchised for years doesn't bother you. F- off.
Technically true, but utterly disingenuous. The oppression of a *group* qua group may not bother an individualist, but the oppression of each individual labeled part of the group does, so F- off yourself.
4G is defined as 100mbit/s for highly mobile units (in a car, on a train) and 1gbit/s for low mobility users (standing still, walking.) Neither LTA nor HSPA qualify.
I'm also interested in changing laws to allow anyone to record
their own phone calls
Many places, no change in law is needed. No federal law prohibits this in the US. 12 states have laws that might apply against it, the other 38 do not, so in most of the US this is legal. In many other countries it is too, you should check if it actually is illegal where you are before deciding the law needs to be changed.
Well, maybe you do, but the point is that isnt the way to solve the problem you are immediately about. What you want to do is catch these people - whether with a camera or otherwise. A security system wont be something desinged with that in mind, but more general goals. It might, for instance, have decoy cameras so as to make it appear better defended, to scare off would-be burglars. You do NOT want to scare these people off, you want to catch them, right?
So focus on that and rethink the problem. One classic and effective technique is to stay in the house while making it appear that you went with everyone else. Then just keep a low profile and very quiet and wait with that baseball bat, and 911 on speed dial...
Slashdot Mirror
http://emperorlinux.com/mfgr/dell/rhino/
Never had much use for Ubuntu personally, but a rhino running slack would be a very nice machine.
Or how much more efficient solar is with ancient technology. Sailing is solar too.
Putting out a spray of bullets is the tactic of the ignorant or incompetent. One small-calibre bullet placed properly does the job that a thousand rounds sprayed around an area on full auto will not.
A crowd of 500 unarmed people in a public place is an easy target for one guy with a rifle. He can do whatever he wants until someone else arrives to rescue. But scatter 5 guys and gals with small calibre pistols and a little training out there and he will go down. Not saying he wont do some damage first, but he will go down. He wont be shooting fish in a basket until the cops arrive. Which serves the goal of deterrence better than the police do anyway.
The swiss system was actually inspirational to the system that the Constitution envisions, but so is the historic English yeomanry. It was intended to work very much as you describe, except that it is all at a local level. Most of those who fought in the revolutionary war did so in these local militia units. Local militia units bought their own equipment, elected their own officers, and might also function as the local fire department/rescue 911 service. They would only become subject to Federal or State authorities in the event of a proper declaration of war or emergency. This avoids many of the problems that standing armies bring.
It doesnt have to imply conscription, local militias were voluntary institutions, though backed by a societal expectation that every able-bodied male do his part.
I agree with you that is not . Still the reality of politics means that you have compromises. The libertarians want the government out of marriage entirely - even handed and liberty focused. The paleo-conservatives, of course, want what they consider 'common sense' to rule - and that means marriage is a man and a woman and anything else cant be right. The progressives want their idea of 'common sense' to rule and that means what the paleo-cons see (not entirely without justification in my view) as using their tax dollars to teach their children to be gay. And the unfortunate fact is that if libertarians want to get anything done we have to hold our noses and form a coalition with one or the other of those groups, compromise to some degree with them on some of their pet issues, and hope to move them towards truly libertarian positions over time while cooperating on some very urgent matters like ending the wars.
And so that is indeed what is happening. The progressives are emasculated and completely ineffective at this point, with Obama in office continuing Bush's policies they are useless. So we coalition with the paleo-conservatives instead, and that means we wind up associating with some positions we might would rather not, but we also get an opportunity to moderate them somewhat, at least.
Ultimately, you have to keep some perspective. Gay marriage, with all due respect to the gay couples that are directly affected, is still relatively unimportant compared to the wars which are bankrupting the country and costing people their lives.
Linus makes a good point. So do you. And probably, ultimately, it will be a good thing - because of your point.
Still there is a difference between writing drivers for hardware, and writing drivers for virtualisation. We all know their aim in that is ultimately to make it harder to actually run linux on the bare hardware, instead of having to run it under windows only. Embrace, extend, extinguish remember?
The only one I care about is the security updates. Performance and memory usage updates? Those would be great, but 3.6 is still a lot leaner and faster than current.
I dont know, it seems like organisational suicide to me, what do your bosses think you have to gain from it?
And yes, I know you were referring to the old versions. I am referring to the current ones, however. They may not be old and unsupported, but they are slower and buggier than 3.6, they suffer from massive breakage, and all evidence seems to suggest that is now the trajectory for Mozilla going forward until the end.
Then why do all my firefox installations continue to nag me to update every time you release a minor update mislabelled as a major rev? I have checked that 'do not ask me again' box a dozen times now. Firefox ignores me.
Sorry, the fatally flawed implementation of threading in gmail is neither new, nor very good. It's a great example of re-inventing the wheel, badly.
Mozilla are clearly going forward at top speed along the full-retard path.
Anyone found a good fork yet?
Sorry, the truth isnt nearly as cleancut as either of you want to make it.
It takes up to 4 years assuming constant peak utilisation according to the source you point to. Constant peak utilisation is obviously an extremely unrealistic assumption.
More plausible usage patterns would result in longer times to break even. In practice tropical installations with well chosen location can get close to that. Marginal usage cases may never recoup in that sense at all though. Economically it can still make sense for other reasons, of course, but that is hardly 'green' if that has any meaning other than being a silly codeword for politically correct.
Back decades ago when I was in 5th grade I remember noting the same thing on many tests. There might be three right answers or no right answers, although it's usually not hard to see which answer they are actually looking for. And it wasnt just 5th grade, this goes on into college. Surely I am not the only one that noticed?
You are correct that they require... counter-action. 'Pushback' is a simplistic framing and part of the reason you are less effective than you should be in your efforts. Opposing force with force is wasted effort, the effective tactician meets his opponents strengths with weakness, yielding the battle quickly onto his own strengths, before pushing back. Judo not karate as the saying goes.
Showing respect for tradition is not an endorsement of superstition. That, sir, is preposterous.
If people were rewriting laws based on Sumerian myths or Shakespeare, what would matter would not be assaulting these foundations of our literature and civilisation, but rather the specific errors in the proposed laws, or the general errors in the approach of those who are misusing this literature.
To put it another way, all you do when they propose these laws is issue a response that many people will perceive (and quite understandably) as an assault on the basis of their culture. That's not drawing flies with honey my friend. I can tell them which biblical verses are being misinterpreted and how. Much more effective out here in red-state land.
Saying the Bible contradicts science is as silly as saying that the Gilgamesh epic, or Shakespeare, contradict science. It's just missing the point. Biblical literalists are missing the point, but I am afraid you are as well. The Bible isnt a science textbook, nor is it the direct and literal word of G_d, and you are being just as perverse in insisting on reading it as the former as they are when they insist it be read as the latter.
I am afraid he is correct.
The bible is simply a book. No particular theological or epistemological viewpoint is inherent to that book.
Some people come to that book with a set viewpoint, expecting the bible to be literal word of G_d with every word true and all that. That certainly is not a view consistent with science, nor is it a view consistent with the bible itself.
Others have other views of the bible may be radically different and not necessarily conflict with science or scientific thinking in any way.
Any term is arbitrary here. Anything linked to the lifespan of the creator is even more arbitrary, since the length of copyright would be different for two works published at the same time, depending on which author died first. It's also dangerous as it has the potential to create motivation for murder where there would otherwise be none.
Here's the thing. You legalise people making derivative works of GPL software, without complying with the license, as long as they wait a reasonable period of time. (I might argue for 3 years not 3 months but certainly shorter than the eternity under US law currrently.) And that in isolation may not be unalloyed good.
But you also repeal the laws that prevent me from immediately reverse engineering the resulting product, and incorporating what I learn back in the GPL product immediately. And all the laws that make it difficult for me to pay someone else to do the job, of course. You legalise an entire new business world. And the GPL would STILL function better than the BSD license ever has. So I could live with that.
Proportional fonts may be generally 'prettier' perhaps but they are certainly not more readable. They destroy plain text formatting which is the quickest, simplest, and most efficient way to format text that isnt actually intended to be printed out or prettified (i.e. email, code, settings files.) Destroying all my formatting and then claiming to have made my texty more readable isnt going to fly.
YES.
Slashdot has never been a place I would point someone at looking for a well-formed webpage, but over the years it just keeps getting worse. After the last 'upgrade' the site is completely unusable without blocking the javascript. It really is ridiculous. A tech site should really learn to use HTML and generate webpages.
Hear hear. HTML should be the top priority on the technical side, and then unicode support. So far as the rest, less slashvertisements and more news would be good. This has been the same answer posted to this sort of question consistently for years. And no one ever seems to listen.
Technically true, but utterly disingenuous. The oppression of a *group* qua group may not bother an individualist, but the oppression of each individual labeled part of the group does, so F- off yourself.
If that's all you care about why ask the question? Whatever the ad tells you is 4g is 4g. Words have no meanings anyway, right?
4G is defined as 100mbit/s for highly mobile units (in a car, on a train) and 1gbit/s for low mobility users (standing still, walking.) Neither LTA nor HSPA qualify.
Many places, no change in law is needed. No federal law prohibits this in the US. 12 states have laws that might apply against it, the other 38 do not, so in most of the US this is legal. In many other countries it is too, you should check if it actually is illegal where you are before deciding the law needs to be changed.
Well, maybe you do, but the point is that isnt the way to solve the problem you are immediately about. What you want to do is catch these people - whether with a camera or otherwise. A security system wont be something desinged with that in mind, but more general goals. It might, for instance, have decoy cameras so as to make it appear better defended, to scare off would-be burglars. You do NOT want to scare these people off, you want to catch them, right?
So focus on that and rethink the problem. One classic and effective technique is to stay in the house while making it appear that you went with everyone else. Then just keep a low profile and very quiet and wait with that baseball bat, and 911 on speed dial...