Quarentine wouldn't have worked on HIV anyway. The disease was first identified in the US, but had it's origin in Africa. By the time it was identified, it was already too late to contain.
Don't be so sure. Cuba implemented rigorous testing and quarantine early on quite successfully. They have since abandoned it and rates are on the rise.
And what makes you think you can trust those proxies? You might remember about the Sarah Palin email hack during the 2008 election. The perp got busted because he used a proxy that claimed it didn't keep logs. Turns out that they did and the owner made sure that the logs were available for the feds.
The question is what would have happened if the government did nothing and let the free market take its course. It's quite possible that these guys were too big to fail and could have taken down the whole system with them.
Am I happy with how the crisis and bailout was handled? No. Does that mean some kind of hugely expensive bailout wasn't necessary? No.
I've heard so many complaints from Python programmers themselves about the Global Interpreter Lock that prevents real threading from occurring that I didn't know that they actually had a threading library.
If the Python community thought everybody was so smart then they'd just tell everybody to use C or C++, which allows you to do memory manipulation and isn't nearly as slow.
Is that why Python doesn't have advanced concepts like threading? Is that why Python is considered a good teaching language? Do you really think there aren't mediocre Python programmers out there?
You're aware that you're talking about Julian Assange, right? Spend the next ten minutes trying to work out a scenario wherein someone sics lawyers on him, finds him (that is, gets through the layers of paranoia embedded deep within him to hide his location and activities), hauls his ass back to whatever jurisdiction is needed for legal proceedings,
You're not informed, because his current location is known and he is pending extradition to Sweden at the very moment:
"Assange must wear an electronic tag, report to police every day and observe a curfew. He also must stay at a registered address - a 10-bedroom mansion in eastern England owned by Vaughan Smith, a WikiLeaks supporter and founder of London's Frontline Club for journalists."
and ultimately manages to get five hundred thousand quid out of him sometime EARLIER than the next twenty-five years (money which, inevitably, has already been spent).
This is the most difficult part. However, supposedly the money is in escrow to pay for his lawyers, so it really depends on who has rights to it first. Common sense says the people who gave it to him under contract should get it first, but the law isn't always common sense.
Anyways, I agree that publishing was the smart thing to do, despite all of the above. I was just correcting the misconception that Assange is some master of concealment that could disappear like a ghost.
Also, even if it was a draft they probably have slipped in a editor (i.e., ghost-author) to 'clean things up' and embellish to their hearts-delight.
The article states is was ghost-written by Andrew O'Hagan, who "had asked for his name to be removed from the book," so it doesn't sound like this guy was "slipped in". Ghost writers are standard fare for autobiographies.
No, you're wrong. I didn't mention the GPL. I said, "If Google wants to market themselves under the open source banner, then they should play by the rules."
It's not that Google is violating a license. It's that they market Android as an open source operating system but don't actually adhere to open source principles. That's fraud.
You can distribute a GPL operating system containing non-free firmware.
You can, but you won't be in compliance with the GPL if you do. Just because people ignore the rules out of practicality doesn't mean the rules aren't being broken.
Debian are very strict GPL observers, yet they distribute an unsupported CD containing non-free firmware
Interesting. I wasn't aware that they were doing this. It is, of course, a compromise on their principles. They went through a big effort to get firmware out of main and into non-free after years of compromising for the sake of practicality.
It looks like they are trying to rationalize this CD as an "unofficial" net install CD only. It might even be OK. However, if there are GPL bits included in this net install CD, then it's still the same problem.
It's still no excuse. Open source isn't about releasing binaries first, and then promising to release the source when you deem it appropriate. If Google wants to market themselves under the open source banner, then they should play by the rules.
No. The binary firmware is software and updatable just like any other software. When the software is not freely distributable, when you can't modify it's source, and when you can't distribute your modifications, then that software is not free-as-in-freedom.
You can't be in compliance with the GPL if you distribute an operating system with such proprietary binaries. This is problematic because some hardware these days require firmware to be loaded by the operating system. That's why distributions like Debian separate them out and require you to download these yourself.
That's because copying is not the same as stealing physical property. If somebody stole my car, I'm out a car. If somebody copies my material, I'm maybe out a sale.
I'm not afraid to admit it. I'd love to see a big crash - explosion - fire.
I remember a Simpsons episode where they went to see a car race. Every time it looked like somebody was about to crash the audience went, "oh... oh...", and then "aww" when the car regained control.
But the fact that they did this sparked the entire conversation about what the cartels are doing.
Because some idiot made a comparison between some Anonymous losers and cartels? Do you really think the problems of the cartels were unknown in Mexico? The problem is catching the perpetrators, not actually pointing out the problem.
Besides, it is unlikely that anonymous could do much to the cartels considering how they tend to operate.
Actually, considering how much people depend on modern technology, I'm willing to bet an elite and dedicated group could gather some serious information targeting attacks. I bet all these guys have smart phones and computers.
Just open source fucking everything and use it to make money on support. There is no gross margin in hardware anymore, and none in the perceivable future -- and Intel knows it.
What a bunch of wishful thinking. You think Intel, AMD, and ARM are going to make the same amount of money if they just open sourced all their designs and relied on support? Intel is doing like IBM and other companies: Open sourcing at a limited level while still keeping their core products proprietary.
Slashdot Mirror
Quarentine wouldn't have worked on HIV anyway. The disease was first identified in the US, but had it's origin in Africa. By the time it was identified, it was already too late to contain.
Don't be so sure. Cuba implemented rigorous testing and quarantine early on quite successfully. They have since abandoned it and rates are on the rise.
And what makes you think you can trust those proxies? You might remember about the Sarah Palin email hack during the 2008 election. The perp got busted because he used a proxy that claimed it didn't keep logs. Turns out that they did and the owner made sure that the logs were available for the feds.
The question is what would have happened if the government did nothing and let the free market take its course. It's quite possible that these guys were too big to fail and could have taken down the whole system with them.
Am I happy with how the crisis and bailout was handled? No. Does that mean some kind of hugely expensive bailout wasn't necessary? No.
I've heard so many complaints from Python programmers themselves about the Global Interpreter Lock that prevents real threading from occurring that I didn't know that they actually had a threading library.
Point taken, though.
If the Python community thought everybody was so smart then they'd just tell everybody to use C or C++, which allows you to do memory manipulation and isn't nearly as slow.
Is that why Python doesn't have advanced concepts like threading? Is that why Python is considered a good teaching language? Do you really think there aren't mediocre Python programmers out there?
You're aware that you're talking about Julian Assange, right? Spend the next ten minutes trying to work out a scenario wherein someone sics lawyers on him, finds him (that is, gets through the layers of paranoia embedded deep within him to hide his location and activities), hauls his ass back to whatever jurisdiction is needed for legal proceedings,
You're not informed, because his current location is known and he is pending extradition to Sweden at the very moment:
"Assange must wear an electronic tag, report to police every day and observe a curfew. He also must stay at a registered address - a 10-bedroom mansion in eastern England owned by Vaughan Smith, a WikiLeaks supporter and founder of London's Frontline Club for journalists."
and ultimately manages to get five hundred thousand quid out of him sometime EARLIER than the next twenty-five years (money which, inevitably, has already been spent).
This is the most difficult part. However, supposedly the money is in escrow to pay for his lawyers, so it really depends on who has rights to it first. Common sense says the people who gave it to him under contract should get it first, but the law isn't always common sense.
Anyways, I agree that publishing was the smart thing to do, despite all of the above. I was just correcting the misconception that Assange is some master of concealment that could disappear like a ghost.
(Granted 500k Pounds, isn't quite poverty)
It might be after he's done with all his lawyer fees. The article reports that the money is currently in escrow for exactly that reason.
Also, even if it was a draft they probably have slipped in a editor (i.e., ghost-author) to 'clean things up' and embellish to their hearts-delight.
The article states is was ghost-written by Andrew O'Hagan, who "had asked for his name to be removed from the book," so it doesn't sound like this guy was "slipped in". Ghost writers are standard fare for autobiographies.
No, you're wrong. I didn't mention the GPL. I said, "If Google wants to market themselves under the open source banner, then they should play by the rules."
It's not that Google is violating a license. It's that they market Android as an open source operating system but don't actually adhere to open source principles. That's fraud.
You can distribute a GPL operating system containing non-free firmware.
You can, but you won't be in compliance with the GPL if you do. Just because people ignore the rules out of practicality doesn't mean the rules aren't being broken.
Debian are very strict GPL observers, yet they distribute an unsupported CD containing non-free firmware
Interesting. I wasn't aware that they were doing this. It is, of course, a compromise on their principles. They went through a big effort to get firmware out of main and into non-free after years of compromising for the sake of practicality.
It looks like they are trying to rationalize this CD as an "unofficial" net install CD only. It might even be OK. However, if there are GPL bits included in this net install CD, then it's still the same problem.
It's still no excuse. Open source isn't about releasing binaries first, and then promising to release the source when you deem it appropriate. If Google wants to market themselves under the open source banner, then they should play by the rules.
No. The binary firmware is software and updatable just like any other software. When the software is not freely distributable, when you can't modify it's source, and when you can't distribute your modifications, then that software is not free-as-in-freedom.
You can't be in compliance with the GPL if you distribute an operating system with such proprietary binaries. This is problematic because some hardware these days require firmware to be loaded by the operating system. That's why distributions like Debian separate them out and require you to download these yourself.
Check out NASA's Earth at Night picture for a comprehensive view. One striking area is to look at the difference between North Korea and South Korea.
Yeah I was a die hard jedi wannabe
Is that you, Star Wars Kid?
That's because copying is not the same as stealing physical property. If somebody stole my car, I'm out a car. If somebody copies my material, I'm maybe out a sale.
His advise was to do lots of firings to appear in charge and for them to be scapegoats.
Those are your words, not Carville's. He was talking about firing over performance. He said:
"For God's sake, why are we still looking at the same political and economic advisers that got us into this mess? It's not working."
Socialism isn't well-defined. Governments as central planners are a common theme, though.
And amusingly enough, the SMBC site is down now, so I can't reach your link.
I'm not afraid to admit it. I'd love to see a big crash - explosion - fire.
I remember a Simpsons episode where they went to see a car race. Every time it looked like somebody was about to crash the audience went, "oh... oh...", and then "aww" when the car regained control.
But the fact that they did this sparked the entire conversation about what the cartels are doing.
Because some idiot made a comparison between some Anonymous losers and cartels? Do you really think the problems of the cartels were unknown in Mexico? The problem is catching the perpetrators, not actually pointing out the problem.
Besides, it is unlikely that anonymous could do much to the cartels considering how they tend to operate.
Actually, considering how much people depend on modern technology, I'm willing to bet an elite and dedicated group could gather some serious information targeting attacks. I bet all these guys have smart phones and computers.
Anonymous would get my respect if they used their hacking skills to infiltrate the murderous thugs instead of defacing government websites.
You're SHIT. It's the only thing you can produce.
That's simply not going to work for companies like Intel. Besides, Intel is still making billions in hardware on a reasonable margin.
Just open source fucking everything and use it to make money on support. There is no gross margin in hardware anymore, and none in the perceivable future -- and Intel knows it.
What a bunch of wishful thinking. You think Intel, AMD, and ARM are going to make the same amount of money if they just open sourced all their designs and relied on support? Intel is doing like IBM and other companies: Open sourcing at a limited level while still keeping their core products proprietary.