Sure, extremism can happen in any culture, but you'd be a fool to deny the fact that extremist Muslims are much more likely to engage in suicide attacks on large numbers of civilians than other extremists. Just something to think about...
And is the US (or any other country, for that matter) supposed to take the same attitude towards each government for eternity, no matter what takes place? 9/11 and related events are quite enough to make one reconsider their perspective on things...
I've got a great example of that. There is a project currently going on that's called PULSE. Ooh, cool sounding acronym, right? Guess what it stands for?
Logistics Processes which are Uniform, Lean and supported by a common System Environment.
Of course, the guys who dreamed this up aren't native English speakers...
Frankly, I'd be surprised if this tool is actually used in terrorist-related investigations more than a small percentage of the time.
That said, as long as the statement holds true that "it includes information that has always been available to investigators but brings it together and enables police to access it with extraordinary speed", I really don't have too much of a problem with it. It doesn't represent an encroachment on privacy rights so much as an improvement in investigatory tools. What needs to develop alongside these tools, of course, are strict guidelines on the manner in which they should be used.
Meanwhile, IBM is waiting and watching, like Andre the Giant ready to squash the whole bunch of them...
Re:This is not about freedom of speech...
on
Linking Dangerously
·
· Score: 1
Even if he had gone to trial, the extra 20 years isn't a mandatory thing - it's a maximum sentence of up to 20 years.
You won't see that or the mention of the explosives found in his home on CNN, either - it makes a better story just to pitch the ideological angle. This isn't a case of the government silencing a free thinker. This is a case of a really dumb kid playing with fire and getting burnt.
In addition to what was on the website, however, it's interesting to read what the raid on his house turned up:
(MR. HOU) The Second Circuit has long held that items, destructive devices such as Molotov cocktails, simply have no legitimate purpose. They are, by definition, tools of violence. In this case, the defendant possessed Molotov cocktails. Pursuant to a search warrant which was authorized in the Central District of California on or about January 24th, the FBI searched the defendant's home. What did they find there? They found explosives. They found M-80s. They found remote control detonating devices. Again, these are items that have no legitimate purpose. They found bottles, over sixty bottles. They found the Molotov cocktails I mentioned.
They also saw in plain view the defendant's silver Toyota 1981 car.
THE COURT: Were there completed Molotov cocktails found?
12 MR. HOU: There were two Molotov cocktails that were in various states of finality. There was one which actually had the wick in it, I understand, from the FBI agent, and it was tested. The materials were tested to determine what was inside, and it was later determined -- the FBI determined that it did contain etroleum products.
The FBI agents asked the defendant at that time whether it contained petroleum products, whether it was, in fact, a Molotov cocktail, and he denied it.
Are you approved for a margin account? That might be why they're not letting you short. As of July 8, only 5.5% of SCOX's float was shorted, which shouldn't cause any constraints like that.
In general that's true, but if the company goes bankrupt, the stock usually gets cancelled and the shorts laugh all the way to the bank (see KMart, Conseco, etc.).
"I am also disappointed that you have chosen litigation rather than good faith discussions with SCO about the problems inherent in Linux." - Darl McBride
Forget that - think an implanted joy buzzer in the hand. Imagine the wacky hilarity when a simple handshake results in "shock & awe" instead, without any visibile apparatus on the prankster's hand! Coming soon from Ronco!
While SCO has talked about such suits as a possibility, you'd have to think that the IBM case would need to be resolved first, so basically this is a non-issue at the user end for at least a year or more.
I knew I should have gone to law school. Seems like the only guys making money off the software biz these days are the lawyers! SCO vs. IBM, Oracle vs. Peoplesoft, etc.
My wife bought his latest CD, after having downloaded some tunes (she might have White Ladder, too). Between that and the concert tix we purchased, I'm quite satisfied that Gray and the biz supporting him is getting compensated. In this case, it was a perfect example of file trading as "product sampler."
First of all, I wasn't pretending to take some moral high ground - just stating the facts, ma'am.
People have to see that taking something without ever intending to pay for it isn't the way to reward the few artists that they enjoy.
If I bought a CD used, the artist wouldn't get "rewarded", would they? Shall we ban the resale market then? I'll reward the artists I enjoy by gladly paying for a ticket to see them live. Just saw David Gray last week, for example, and had a great time.
The article contains an interesting point about the end of the replacement cycle, during which people bought CD's to replace their existing vinyl & cassette tapes. Where the music industry says that CD sales fell by 10%, it would be useful to see a split between newly-released material vs. titles released at least 10 years ago, and how these two groups fared.
On top of that issue, there are of course several other factors that are at work - the soft economy during 2001/2002, competitors for the teenage spending dollar, and of course the rise of online file trading. I know personally that I haven't bought a CD in a couple years, mostly due to the fact I haven't heard anything that compelling, but also that if I want a particular song (rather then blow $$$ on the whole CD), I can get it in a couple minutes online. If these knuckleheads could implement a useful, cheap service to pay for songs, I just might do it. But I want to be able to burn CD's to play in my car, and have access to a wide selection of music - not just one company's stable of trick ponies.
Another aspect that's left out, of course, is actual customer service (as opposed to merely cellular network coverage). I'm sure the majority of people with cell phones have at least one horror story - like my wife who had to cancel her AT&T Wireless phone service on 4 separate occasions before they finally stopped sending us bills...
Sharing of music "files" dates back to the stone age and before when visiting tribespeople learned new songs at the campfire while visiting remote villiages.
Wasn't that awesome when Napster v0.000035 enabled support for wandering minstrels?
One way in which a client can render their shares unavailable to short sellers is by requesting the actual paper certificate for their stock. While I don't know for sure, I would guess that what the brokers generally do is "lend" shares out of the overall pool of stock that their clients hold, instead of assigning specific shares from specific clients. For example, if Ameritrade's clients collectively hold 1,000,000 shares of GM, short sellers who are clients of Ameritrade could sell up to 1,000,000 shares short. If a long wants to sell their shares, Ameritrade would call in the short to make the transaction.
That's why short sellers have to be approved for such activity, and agree to have X amount of cash on hand to offset liabilities, etc. It's all very legal, just not particularly well understood by the average joe.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure, extremism can happen in any culture, but you'd be a fool to deny the fact that extremist Muslims are much more likely to engage in suicide attacks on large numbers of civilians than other extremists. Just something to think about...
And is the US (or any other country, for that matter) supposed to take the same attitude towards each government for eternity, no matter what takes place? 9/11 and related events are quite enough to make one reconsider their perspective on things...
May I suggest we shower him with gifts?
I've got a great example of that. There is a project currently going on that's called PULSE. Ooh, cool sounding acronym, right? Guess what it stands for?
Logistics Processes which are Uniform, Lean and supported by a common System Environment.
Of course, the guys who dreamed this up aren't native English speakers...
Frankly, I'd be surprised if this tool is actually used in terrorist-related investigations more than a small percentage of the time.
That said, as long as the statement holds true that "it includes information that has always been available to investigators but brings it together and enables police to access it with extraordinary speed", I really don't have too much of a problem with it. It doesn't represent an encroachment on privacy rights so much as an improvement in investigatory tools. What needs to develop alongside these tools, of course, are strict guidelines on the manner in which they should be used.
Considering that this is coming around "through the back door" I'd suggest a change from "the over-your-shoulder dept."...
Meanwhile, IBM is waiting and watching, like Andre the Giant ready to squash the whole bunch of them...
Even if he had gone to trial, the extra 20 years isn't a mandatory thing - it's a maximum sentence of up to 20 years.
You won't see that or the mention of the explosives found in his home on CNN, either - it makes a better story just to pitch the ideological angle. This isn't a case of the government silencing a free thinker. This is a case of a really dumb kid playing with fire and getting burnt.
Who own de source code?
Does this mean Darl McBride's going to wake up with a penguin head in his bed???
Are you approved for a margin account? That might be why they're not letting you short. As of July 8, only 5.5% of SCOX's float was shorted, which shouldn't cause any constraints like that.
In general that's true, but if the company goes bankrupt, the stock usually gets cancelled and the shorts laugh all the way to the bank (see KMart, Conseco, etc.).
"I am also disappointed that you have chosen litigation rather than good faith discussions with SCO about the problems inherent in Linux." - Darl McBride
This guy oughtta write for Letterman!
Reminds me of one of my favorite jokes...
"You know when I was in Memphis I came this close to seeing Elvis, but my shovel broke."
Forget that - think an implanted joy buzzer in the hand. Imagine the wacky hilarity when a simple handshake results in "shock & awe" instead, without any visibile apparatus on the prankster's hand! Coming soon from Ronco!
While SCO has talked about such suits as a possibility, you'd have to think that the IBM case would need to be resolved first, so basically this is a non-issue at the user end for at least a year or more.
I knew I should have gone to law school. Seems like the only guys making money off the software biz these days are the lawyers! SCO vs. IBM, Oracle vs. Peoplesoft, etc.
I believe it says "World's Fattest", which some people underneath...
While the winners are indeed well done, the PHB entry is truly inspired. Any chance some of the Honorable Mentions might become available?
My wife bought his latest CD, after having downloaded some tunes (she might have White Ladder, too). Between that and the concert tix we purchased, I'm quite satisfied that Gray and the biz supporting him is getting compensated. In this case, it was a perfect example of file trading as "product sampler."
First of all, I wasn't pretending to take some moral high ground - just stating the facts, ma'am.
People have to see that taking something without ever intending to pay for it isn't the way to reward the few artists that they enjoy.
If I bought a CD used, the artist wouldn't get "rewarded", would they? Shall we ban the resale market then? I'll reward the artists I enjoy by gladly paying for a ticket to see them live. Just saw David Gray last week, for example, and had a great time.
The article contains an interesting point about the end of the replacement cycle, during which people bought CD's to replace their existing vinyl & cassette tapes. Where the music industry says that CD sales fell by 10%, it would be useful to see a split between newly-released material vs. titles released at least 10 years ago, and how these two groups fared.
On top of that issue, there are of course several other factors that are at work - the soft economy during 2001/2002, competitors for the teenage spending dollar, and of course the rise of online file trading. I know personally that I haven't bought a CD in a couple years, mostly due to the fact I haven't heard anything that compelling, but also that if I want a particular song (rather then blow $$$ on the whole CD), I can get it in a couple minutes online. If these knuckleheads could implement a useful, cheap service to pay for songs, I just might do it. But I want to be able to burn CD's to play in my car, and have access to a wide selection of music - not just one company's stable of trick ponies.
Another aspect that's left out, of course, is actual customer service (as opposed to merely cellular network coverage). I'm sure the majority of people with cell phones have at least one horror story - like my wife who had to cancel her AT&T Wireless phone service on 4 separate occasions before they finally stopped sending us bills...
Sharing of music "files" dates back to the stone age and before when visiting tribespeople learned new songs at the campfire while visiting remote villiages.
Wasn't that awesome when Napster v0.000035 enabled support for wandering minstrels?
One way in which a client can render their shares unavailable to short sellers is by requesting the actual paper certificate for their stock. While I don't know for sure, I would guess that what the brokers generally do is "lend" shares out of the overall pool of stock that their clients hold, instead of assigning specific shares from specific clients. For example, if Ameritrade's clients collectively hold 1,000,000 shares of GM, short sellers who are clients of Ameritrade could sell up to 1,000,000 shares short. If a long wants to sell their shares, Ameritrade would call in the short to make the transaction.
That's why short sellers have to be approved for such activity, and agree to have X amount of cash on hand to offset liabilities, etc. It's all very legal, just not particularly well understood by the average joe.