From the link you posted: According to Chief Daugherty, "If my people have a reason to be speeding, I will excuse them. On the other hand, if they don't have a reason, I won't.
If "his people" have a reason to be speeding, they should have their sirens and flashing lights on. Otherwise, they *are* breaking the law and (according to official rhetoric) endangering lives. There should be no discretion unless the same reasoning is applied to the population at large.
So unless I can give Chief Daugherty a "reason" and be "excused", I'd say he is as corrupt as the rest of them.
Its all complete bullshit. Our congressmen are being legally bribed all the time right in front of our faces. The faster people start realizing that fact, the faster we can outlaw all "donations" to any elected official.
Who exactly are that "we" that you're talking about?
"You" have approximately the same chance of outlawing campaign donations as cattle outlawing the hamburger industry.
There are two kinds of people, the powerful (rich, well connected, whatever you choose to call it) and those that don't matter. She system is set up so that the 2nd group cannot effect any change and the 1st doesn't want to.
Oh please! Who were we supposed to vote for? McCain/Palin? Most people voted against them, not for Obama. The big problem is we have a horrible choice, the Democrats, and opposing them an even worse choice, the Republicans. Unless we can get real campaign reform third parties are not a viable option.
When enough people stop parroting that line and actually start voting "third parties" then suddenly they will become a viable option.
The penalty is right in the notice. All proper DCMA take down request require this:
I swear, under penalty of perjury, that the information in the notification is accurate and that I am the copyright owner or am authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an exclusive right that is allegedly infringed.
A false or abusive notice can land the petitioner on the hook for perjury. The problem is getting it prosecuted and making the charges stick.
You misunderstand the statement.
If I claim that post #33674456 by RattFink infringes on my post #33676750, the only part "under penalty of perjury" is the fact that I am the rights holder of post #33676750 (or authorized to act on their behalf) and that my name and address are correct.
But your point is right - "not yet". Hopefully it will stay that way
Until we get ACTA or an equivalent thereof, which seems to be Harper's wet dream. Not that the Liberals are better - after spending my time crafting a letter that explains exactly what is wrong with the ACTA approach, my "elected representative" send me a canned "answer" in which he "reaffirms his support for intellectual property protections".
Which just served to reaffirm my support of any candidate not affiliated with either of these two parties (since we don't have independents in our riding, that means either the Greens or the NDP).
Most of "Israel and nukes" things are just unconfirmed speculations.
The post I replied to stated: "The only reason that Iran doesn't attack Israel is because they know that Israel has nukes, and the will to use them with very little provocation."
Since I have no hard and verifiable facts regarding Israel's nuclear capabilities, I decided to address the second part of that statement. My point was that the *only* reported situation where Israel was (allegedly) considering a nuclear option was when the top brass were afraid that a defeat in the '73 war was imminent, which would have meant the end of Israel. That, IMHO, refutes the claim.
Try Comodo personal firewall. I used Kerio back in the day and loved it. Comodo is pretty much identical in all features.
Another user of Comodo here. Be aware that Comodo firewall also contains a module that analyzes apps for suspicious behaviour. I turned it off since I felt that MSE covers that angle but YMMV.
Probably because they didn't need to. Israel counterattacked with conventional weapons so successfully that they were forced to give up the land they gained. It was a complete rout.
Eventually.
According to many sources, at the first stages of the war though, there was panic at the top. So much in fact that the nuclear option was seriously considered. Read about it, fascinating subject.
Yes, but that was also during the Cold War. Firing nuclear weapons during that period of time could have resulted in a much bigger shit-storm then the conflict that was going on.
I respectfully disagree.
Look up Israel on a map. It is a very small country with less-than-friendly neighbours. The Israeli military doctrine at the time was based on the assumption that it couldn't afford to lose even a single war. Therefore, from Israel's point of view, even heating up the cold war would have been less of a "shit-storm" than its total annihilation.
The only reason that Iran doesn't attack Israel is because they know that Israel has nukes, and the will to use them with very little provocation.
Assuming that the Wikipedia article is correct, Israel has had nuclear capabilities (~20 bombs) during the '73 war and did not use it, even though the Arab military success at the beginning of the war was definitely more than "very little provocation".
I wonder how many slashdotters looked at the subject line and traced the "parent" links all the way up looking for the original comment, only to find out that the "Re:" caused the last 3 characters to be truncated.
The problem is that if these extras are so cheap that Intel figures they can afford to put them in every CPU even if only a few people buy them, then there's clearly a large disparity between the cost to produce the feature and the current market price for it. Long-term, this typically happens when there's a distinct lack of competition and a natural monopoly is arising. Normally, competition will drive the market price for features down to a small percentage above their cost to produce.
The random number is an unlock key. It cannot be read out of the processor by any means. It can, however, be compared to a user-supplied unlock key written to some special purpose register by software. Once again, the method for writing to this register need not be hidden. The unlock mechanism is simple: if the user-supplied key matches the factory-supplied key, the processor unlocks the upgrade functionality.
Since the factory-supplied key can never be read out, all that is necessary is to make sure they're secret and unguessable. Secret is a matter of keeping the data secure inside Intel as you said; the only way they let unlock keys out is if users buy them, and by using unique pairs of serial numbers and unlock keys Intel never gives out data that someone can adapt to unlock all processors. Unguessable is easy: just restrict the mechanism so it only accepts one user supplied key per second, or something like that, and make the random key string long enough that it would be impractical to brute force it.
Even easier than a per-second limit:
Have two registers: R0 - Internal use, comes up as 0, set to 1 when writing to R1. R1 - Write only, for entering the secret number. The extra processor capabilities are unlocked when the user write to R1 and R0=0.
Now you have to power-cycle the processor between tries.
> This constant paranoia over pedophilia has gotten insane. While it is a terrible crime [...]
No it isn't. Child molestation is a terrible crime; pedophilia is a psychological disorder, which may or may not result in abuse (similarly to the way gynephilia may or may not lead to rape).
Slashdot Mirror
No, he doesn't.
From the link you posted:
According to Chief Daugherty, "If my people have a reason to be speeding, I will excuse them. On the other hand, if they don't have a reason, I won't.
If "his people" have a reason to be speeding, they should have their sirens and flashing lights on. Otherwise, they *are* breaking the law and (according to official rhetoric) endangering lives. There should be no discretion unless the same reasoning is applied to the population at large.
So unless I can give Chief Daugherty a "reason" and be "excused", I'd say he is as corrupt as the rest of them.
Who exactly are that "we" that you're talking about?
"You" have approximately the same chance of outlawing campaign donations as cattle outlawing the hamburger industry.
There are two kinds of people, the powerful (rich, well connected, whatever you choose to call it) and those that don't matter.
She system is set up so that the 2nd group cannot effect any change and the 1st doesn't want to.
When enough people stop parroting that line and actually start voting "third parties" then suddenly they will become a viable option.
By whom?
According to this report 98.58% of the US voters, who obediently keep voting for either Kang or Kodos.
What about FreeCiv?
You misunderstand the statement.
If I claim that post #33674456 by RattFink infringes on my post #33676750, the only part "under penalty of perjury" is the fact that I am the rights holder of post #33676750 (or authorized to act on their behalf) and that my name and address are correct.
Until we get ACTA or an equivalent thereof, which seems to be Harper's wet dream. Not that the Liberals are better - after spending my time crafting a letter that explains exactly what is wrong with the ACTA approach, my "elected representative" send me a canned "answer" in which he "reaffirms his support for intellectual property protections".
Which just served to reaffirm my support of any candidate not affiliated with either of these two parties (since we don't have independents in our riding, that means either the Greens or the NDP).
Yet.
My bet is that they will uphold the ruling, as they seem to know pretty well which side the bread is buttered on.
Then why did you deny others the same joy?
The post I replied to stated: "The only reason that Iran doesn't attack Israel is because they know that Israel has nukes, and the will to use them with very little provocation."
Since I have no hard and verifiable facts regarding Israel's nuclear capabilities, I decided to address the second part of that statement. My point was that the *only* reported situation where Israel was (allegedly) considering a nuclear option was when the top brass were afraid that a defeat in the '73 war was imminent, which would have meant the end of Israel. That, IMHO, refutes the claim.
How does any government treat people that that leak their secret programs to the press?
Another user of Comodo here. Be aware that Comodo firewall also contains a module that analyzes apps for suspicious behaviour. I turned it off since I felt that MSE covers that angle but YMMV.
Eventually.
According to many sources, at the first stages of the war though, there was panic at the top. So much in fact that the nuclear option was seriously considered. Read about it, fascinating subject.
XP has an outgoing firewall? I thought it was only incoming.
(Disclaimer: I haven't used the XP firewall for a very long time)
Yes, you do. Vote independent.
I respectfully disagree.
Look up Israel on a map. It is a very small country with less-than-friendly neighbours. The Israeli military doctrine at the time was based on the assumption that it couldn't afford to lose even a single war. Therefore, from Israel's point of view, even heating up the cold war would have been less of a "shit-storm" than its total annihilation.
Assuming that the Wikipedia article is correct, Israel has had nuclear capabilities (~20 bombs) during the '73 war and did not use it, even though the Arab military success at the beginning of the war was definitely more than "very little provocation".
I wonder how many slashdotters looked at the subject line and traced the "parent" links all the way up looking for the original comment, only to find out that the "Re:" caused the last 3 characters to be truncated.
By the same logic, it sure doesn't cost $2,599.00 in bandwidth for Adobe to let you download Creative Suite 5 Master Collection (warning: Flash).
Even easier than a per-second limit:
Have two registers:
R0 - Internal use, comes up as 0, set to 1 when writing to R1.
R1 - Write only, for entering the secret number.
The extra processor capabilities are unlocked when the user write to R1 and R0=0.
Now you have to power-cycle the processor between tries.
Unfortunately, when push comes to shove, the only definition that matters is the one used by the "weirdo legislators" in your jurisdiction.
I would not have taken issue with this statement if stick-figure drawings could not be (legally!) classified as CP.
> This constant paranoia over pedophilia has gotten insane. While it is a terrible crime [...]
No it isn't.
Child molestation is a terrible crime; pedophilia is a psychological disorder, which may or may not result in abuse (similarly to the way gynephilia may or may not lead to rape).