I dont think he honed the skill to facilitate his day to day existence. Its pretty obvious he did it because he enjoys the challenge. If you don't understand why he would enjoy a challenge, you have a really shit life ahead of you.
that doesnt just apply to slashdot, it also applies to reality. because employing free independant thought quickly reveals fox news to be a flagrant right wing propaganda machine. if you cant see that you arent independant minded or free-thinking, you are intellectually blind.
thats like saying "how do you face your accuser when it is a magnifying glass?" the computer is a tool being operated by detectives, it accuses no one of anything.
i find that if i have to replace a motherboard (the only system component that might precipitate an XP reinstall) just booting into safe mode and installing the new drivers works fine.
"observed on every street by the police via surveillance cameras"
That's just a lie. Either that or you are spouting out of ignorance. Read the rest of the thread. ALL OF IT.
I also consider not letting every tom, dick and harry have a gun an advantage over the U.S. since we have drastically lower violent gun deaths than the US.
Of course I understand that you would hold the opinion that the risk of everyone having a gun is outweighed by the benefit of being able to overthrow the government whenever you see fit. I'm aware of all the arguments for and against so we dont need to go through it all again here, since no one ever reaches a conclusion, I'm sure you wont be able to convince me, and i wont be able to convince you.
I think he was talking about developers taking the responsibility to ensure patches are released in a timely manner for exploits. And in this context he was saying it wasnt Mozilla's "fault" that they had done nothing to correct this problem since they weren't made aware of it.
As for bugs being the "fault" of the developers in the first place, that is literally true but has an overloaded implication in that declaring something as somebody's "fault" can imply they have been behaving negligently or incompetantly, when in fact even the most competant and dilligent developer cannot produce perfectly functional code on the first attempt, and with even marginally complex projects, bugs can be so obfuscated that it is impossible for the developer's QA team find them all, and certanly to find them all before any of them are noticed by users. In this imperfect situation, the best solution is to respond to issues discovered by users as quickly as is necessary to avoid significant problems for the users. However if the users in question decline to report the problems they discover to the developers and instead develop and release an exploit for them, that is totally outside the control of the project developers, and the best they can do in that situation is to examine the exploit to determine the vulnerability and produce a patch for it, albeit later than would be optimal. So up to this point in time, Mozilla are not at fault.
would the US and UK government really be willing to establish an Iraqi government and hand power over to them if they thought there were nukes lying around the desert somewhere?
i'm not having "my country's freer than yours" pissing competition, im just pointing out that britian isnt the police state people seem to think it is. it is however plagued by voter apathy and arrogant politicians, and i agree it isnt a very good soceity to live and. and yes i intend to get off as soon as i have the money, so i'm not necessarily the dumbass you presume.
no driving with 10 kids in the car (3 of which were in the boot*) can get you arrested.
i totally agree with the police for stopping her as it was safer to be driven off by the police than fleeing in an overloaded car full of kids, but it was pretty mean spirited of the judge to actually punish her.
i see what you're saying, but its not just the powers that be in the government, its often the media that portray dissent as treachery as well. and they pretty much control the opinion of everyone who doesnt want to think for themselves (which sadly is the majority of people).
exactly such a thing was splashed all over the papers and news when a whistleblower from the MOD was found to have "comitted suicide" in the woods. but the government weasled out of it due to lack of concrete evidence. also we now have a big scandal all over the papers about what really happened to princess diana and how the royal family conspired to have her killed. in america this would be treasonous and shot down as insane conspiracy theories.
i wasnt comparing apples to oranges. you just have a different view of what constitues a critiscim of the US government. a middle of the road "i dont like soldiers dying in a war" opinion is not a criticism of the US government. its a token platitude.
guns are smoking left right and centre with regards to the US goverment's own records of what it does to foreign peasants, but no one takes any notice because it doesnt appear in the mainstream media.
arent you just repeating what bill o reilly insists is the case? not that i know otherwise, but i am loath to take anything he says at face value, as he seems to be hatefilled and duplicitous.
by "socially acceptable" i mean it would be allowed on mainstream news channels, not just that you're allowed to tell your freinds that you think george bush is a bad president without getting sent to guantanamo.
No i'm basing it on watching the american media and reading various political commentaries over the past 5 years.
The critisicms you say you able to speak freely of in conservative circles are pretty safe and watered down. Could you get away with presenting a documentary on a prime time mainstream channel about the shady connections between the bush family and house of saud, and infleunce this has exerted over the "war on terror"? or any other of the manifold outrages the US government has perpetrated in developing countries since the 2nd world war?
Would any one even take you seriously, or would you be shot straight down as a left wing conspiracy theorist nutcase?
we have the same thing when satellite and cable arrived over here instead of plain old RF transmission. Sky TV (murdoch's outfit) monopolised satellite TV after a couple of years and have done ever since. luckily digital VHF broadcast is starting to take hold and you get lots of satellite channels that had to piggy back on Sky TV for free now over the airwaves.
I know what you mean, we have Murdoch News Corp drivel in this country too, and trouble is it's designed to entertain and play on the ignorance that most people seem all too happy to wallow in nowadays.
luckily it is counteracted by some genuinely moderate and non biased output from the BBC that pretty much everyone is exposed to, which is how we are in the situation where the populace is always critical of anything questionable the government does.
I'm glad to hear there is something to counteract fox in the US and i hope it does the job.
all true, but just because a tiny minority of muslims are murderous fiends doesnt follow that they ALL MUST BE. Muslim isnt an absolute term. Its like Christian. How many different interpretations of the bible are there? Christian could mean a zillion different things. And yes belief in stuff like this is irrational. But do you know anyone who is entirely rational? I bet there are things you believe that arent rational and you dont even realise it.
Slashdot Mirror
I dont think he honed the skill to facilitate his day to day existence. Its pretty obvious he did it because he enjoys the challenge. If you don't understand why he would enjoy a challenge, you have a really shit life ahead of you.
fair enough
that doesnt just apply to slashdot, it also applies to reality. because employing free independant thought quickly reveals fox news to be a flagrant right wing propaganda machine. if you cant see that you arent independant minded or free-thinking, you are intellectually blind.
thats like saying "how do you face your accuser when it is a magnifying glass?" the computer is a tool being operated by detectives, it accuses no one of anything.
i find that if i have to replace a motherboard (the only system component that might precipitate an XP reinstall) just booting into safe mode and installing the new drivers works fine.
"observed on every street by the police via surveillance cameras"
That's just a lie. Either that or you are spouting out of ignorance. Read the rest of the thread. ALL OF IT.
I also consider not letting every tom, dick and harry have a gun an advantage over the U.S. since we have drastically lower violent gun deaths than the US.
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvintl.html
Of course I understand that you would hold the opinion that the risk of everyone having a gun is outweighed by the benefit of being able to overthrow the government whenever you see fit. I'm aware of all the arguments for and against so we dont need to go through it all again here, since no one ever reaches a conclusion, I'm sure you wont be able to convince me, and i wont be able to convince you.
wwhat kind of bastards would threaten to evict a dying man? so what if he cant pay his rent, he'll be evicted by the grim reaper in a few of months.
I think he was talking about developers taking the responsibility to ensure patches are released in a timely manner for exploits. And in this context he was saying it wasnt Mozilla's "fault" that they had done nothing to correct this problem since they weren't made aware of it.
As for bugs being the "fault" of the developers in the first place, that is literally true but has an overloaded implication in that declaring something as somebody's "fault" can imply they have been behaving negligently or incompetantly, when in fact even the most competant and dilligent developer cannot produce perfectly functional code on the first attempt, and with even marginally complex projects, bugs can be so obfuscated that it is impossible for the developer's QA team find them all, and certanly to find them all before any of them are noticed by users. In this imperfect situation, the best solution is to respond to issues discovered by users as quickly as is necessary to avoid significant problems for the users. However if the users in question decline to report the problems they discover to the developers and instead develop and release an exploit for them, that is totally outside the control of the project developers, and the best they can do in that situation is to examine the exploit to determine the vulnerability and produce a patch for it, albeit later than would be optimal. So up to this point in time, Mozilla are not at fault.
would the US and UK government really be willing to establish an Iraqi government and hand power over to them if they thought there were nukes lying around the desert somewhere?
perhaps thats why bush was so convinced there were WMDs there. all though i dont think he ever claimed that if it were the case.
if there were WMDs they'd have been discovered after the US occupied the country
i'm not having "my country's freer than yours" pissing competition, im just pointing out that britian isnt the police state people seem to think it is. it is however plagued by voter apathy and arrogant politicians, and i agree it isnt a very good soceity to live and. and yes i intend to get off as soon as i have the money, so i'm not necessarily the dumbass you presume.
no driving with 10 kids in the car (3 of which were in the boot*) can get you arrested.
i totally agree with the police for stopping her as it was safer to be driven off by the police than fleeing in an overloaded car full of kids, but it was pretty mean spirited of the judge to actually punish her.
*that's the trunk to you yanks.
i wikipedia'd him but i still dont get the joke :p
i see what you're saying, but its not just the powers that be in the government, its often the media that portray dissent as treachery as well. and they pretty much control the opinion of everyone who doesnt want to think for themselves (which sadly is the majority of people).
you'd better tell google their calculator doesnt work
1.21 gigawatts / 88mph
exactly such a thing was splashed all over the papers and news when a whistleblower from the MOD was found to have "comitted suicide" in the woods. but the government weasled out of it due to lack of concrete evidence. also we now have a big scandal all over the papers about what really happened to princess diana and how the royal family conspired to have her killed. in america this would be treasonous and shot down as insane conspiracy theories.
i wasnt comparing apples to oranges. you just have a different view of what constitues a critiscim of the US government. a middle of the road "i dont like soldiers dying in a war" opinion is not a criticism of the US government. its a token platitude.
guns are smoking left right and centre with regards to the US goverment's own records of what it does to foreign peasants, but no one takes any notice because it doesnt appear in the mainstream media.
arent you just repeating what bill o reilly insists is the case? not that i know otherwise, but i am loath to take anything he says at face value, as he seems to be hatefilled and duplicitous.
yeah but you cant say that on the news (even with the swearing removed)
in what respect?
by "socially acceptable" i mean it would be allowed on mainstream news channels, not just that you're allowed to tell your freinds that you think george bush is a bad president without getting sent to guantanamo.
No i'm basing it on watching the american media and reading various political commentaries over the past 5 years.
The critisicms you say you able to speak freely of in conservative circles are pretty safe and watered down. Could you get away with presenting a documentary on a prime time mainstream channel about the shady connections between the bush family and house of saud, and infleunce this has exerted over the "war on terror"? or any other of the manifold outrages the US government has perpetrated in developing countries since the 2nd world war?
Would any one even take you seriously, or would you be shot straight down as a left wing conspiracy theorist nutcase?
we have the same thing when satellite and cable arrived over here instead of plain old RF transmission. Sky TV (murdoch's outfit) monopolised satellite TV after a couple of years and have done ever since. luckily digital VHF broadcast is starting to take hold and you get lots of satellite channels that had to piggy back on Sky TV for free now over the airwaves.
I know what you mean, we have Murdoch News Corp drivel in this country too, and trouble is it's designed to entertain and play on the ignorance that most people seem all too happy to wallow in nowadays.
luckily it is counteracted by some genuinely moderate and non biased output from the BBC that pretty much everyone is exposed to, which is how we are in the situation where the populace is always critical of anything questionable the government does.
I'm glad to hear there is something to counteract fox in the US and i hope it does the job.
all true, but just because a tiny minority of muslims are murderous fiends doesnt follow that they ALL MUST BE. Muslim isnt an absolute term. Its like Christian. How many different interpretations of the bible are there? Christian could mean a zillion different things. And yes belief in stuff like this is irrational. But do you know anyone who is entirely rational? I bet there are things you believe that arent rational and you dont even realise it.