That's all well and good, but honestly, how would you propose we stop government from editing wikipedia. Wikipedia is what it is. An open community inviting everyone to the table. Do you think Google has any less at stake than the Department of Justice? Maybe, I'm sure they are happily moderating their wikipedia pages. Would THEY be justified in changing articles? I doubt it, but everyone has a stake in information. Wikipedia is information, everyone has a stake in wikipedia. As much as I hate to say it, shutting off any one side of the argument throws off the balance that a site like wikipedia should create naturally.
Wikiscanner appears to have nothing to do with the department of justice. Besides, If an IP from the DOJ tries to erase a particular scandel from wikipedia or wiki-whatever, doesn't that, in a way, verify the accuracy of the report?
I really look at this as more of a security issue than a privacy one. I think its less about privacy because one would have to assume in order to place this device on your computer police would have to have the correct authorization (ie: a warrant). I'm more concerned about the security implications of a device that simply plugs in and extracts all that information. However, I guess this would require physical access to the machine, and generally speaking, once someone has physical access, you're done for anyway.
that means there's a defined mechanism you can use to completely defeat any form of security in Windows. And, that's bad; someone will figure this out. The user???
I'd be suprised if they DID. How does Apple benefit from someone underselling their hardware and competing with them. If they truely had Apple's blessing, I'm pretty sure you'd be able to update your operating system.
You're actually complaining that the an article in the New York Times is too U.S. centric? I know bashing the US will surely get you modded up, as I'm sure defending them will surely get me modded down, but you have to look at the sources that are cited.
As an aside, I don't think Apple is a good fit for this market. Aside from the obvious security holes, they will have to play nice with Microsoft Outlook. They've played nice with Microsoft in the past, and I think they can in this instance. Also - I think a business version of the iPhone will first require a redesign. Just my opinion, Apple is good at making products that fill a specific niche in the market. They create products that are designed to fill one specific need, instead of creating one product that fills all needs.
Truth be told - People aren't really making it all that difficult to have their data mined. If you put information out there, who's to say the government or any other company shouldn't mine it. In the end, you were the one who made the decision to make it available.
God - Its CRASHING and I haven't EVEN downloaded it yet!! That's it... I was going to get into this whole Linux thing, but I'm going back to my stable Windows environment.
Why don't we start shooting nukes into space? No seriously hear me out on this. First, we may accidently divert a near earth object. and second, if aliens come around to suck out our atmosphere, they may just pass right on through to the next planet (They don't want none of this.)
Microsoft-Novell Takes Open-Source to China This headline tears me in so many different directions.... Is this a good thing? It has Microsoft and China so I feel like I should hate it, but it also talks about open source. Oh god, my head hurts... I think I have to take a nap.
I agree that it has a lot to do with personifying animals, but I think it hardly has anything to do with Hollywood. Most of the civilized world finds eating dogs disgusting, while other countries see no problem with it. Is it really so different? probably not, but these animals are pets in the rest of the world which might be the reason for our hesitation. We see human-like qualities in them.
But I think you missed my point - Since the majority of people will never see food on a farm, we are thereby divorced from our source of food. Which, in turn, makes me wonder how we can place any kind of personification on any of these animals, or, at least, any more than people who actually worked on farms.
There is a lot of credible evidence that modern christians are anti-truth because they ignore vast mounds of physical evidence because it contradicts genesis. They have been caught lying and suppressing the truth. They are not acting christ like.. or even disciple like. They do not value the truth. They do not respect honest seekers of truth. Wow - you're really trying to cast everyone in the same light. Saying Christians believe a lot of the items is above is highly inaccurate. I really don't identify myself as Christian, actually I would probably consider myself agnostic. A lot of these items depend greatly on the form of Christianity you are referring to. Catholicism, for example, does not interpret these accounts literally. Rather, they take them for what they were - pagan stories with a Jewish spin. There is a great danger in interpretting the bible literally - it wasn't really meant for that reason.
Agreed - but since we have these social norms now that divorces us from our food supply. Doesn't it seem strange that we ACTUALLY care about these animals? It would seem to me that the old addage "out of sight, out of mind" would apply. I, myself, have toiled in vegetarianism, and personally, I think it's great if they can find an alternative to meat - especially because there will be more alternatives. I mean lets face it, I think most of us can agree that the kind of hardships these animals endure before being butchered is just a bit ridiculous.
Slashdot Mirror
I just assumed some boat had anchored off the coast somewhere.
That's all well and good, but honestly, how would you propose we stop government from editing wikipedia. Wikipedia is what it is. An open community inviting everyone to the table. Do you think Google has any less at stake than the Department of Justice? Maybe, I'm sure they are happily moderating their wikipedia pages. Would THEY be justified in changing articles? I doubt it, but everyone has a stake in information. Wikipedia is information, everyone has a stake in wikipedia. As much as I hate to say it, shutting off any one side of the argument throws off the balance that a site like wikipedia should create naturally.
Wikiscanner appears to have nothing to do with the department of justice. Besides, If an IP from the DOJ tries to erase a particular scandel from wikipedia or wiki-whatever, doesn't that, in a way, verify the accuracy of the report?
I really look at this as more of a security issue than a privacy one. I think its less about privacy because one would have to assume in order to place this device on your computer police would have to have the correct authorization (ie: a warrant). I'm more concerned about the security implications of a device that simply plugs in and extracts all that information. However, I guess this would require physical access to the machine, and generally speaking, once someone has physical access, you're done for anyway.
If that was the case, Apple would've licensed out its software to Dell and HP.
One word - Slllllllllllllllloooooooooooooooooooooow!!!
That's funny - Back in the day, I used 10 megs of midi music, animated gifs, and the blink tag!
I'd be suprised if they DID. How does Apple benefit from someone underselling their hardware and competing with them. If they truely had Apple's blessing, I'm pretty sure you'd be able to update your operating system.
You're actually complaining that the an article in the New York Times is too U.S. centric? I know bashing the US will surely get you modded up, as I'm sure defending them will surely get me modded down, but you have to look at the sources that are cited.
As an aside, I don't think Apple is a good fit for this market. Aside from the obvious security holes, they will have to play nice with Microsoft Outlook. They've played nice with Microsoft in the past, and I think they can in this instance. Also - I think a business version of the iPhone will first require a redesign. Just my opinion, Apple is good at making products that fill a specific niche in the market. They create products that are designed to fill one specific need, instead of creating one product that fills all needs.
Truth be told - People aren't really making it all that difficult to have their data mined. If you put information out there, who's to say the government or any other company shouldn't mine it. In the end, you were the one who made the decision to make it available.
and if the i386 one doesn't work... just download it for Sparc!
For those of us who can't run Ubuntu, Kubuntu, or Xubuntu - don't forget about Window 3.1.
God - Its CRASHING and I haven't EVEN downloaded it yet!! That's it... I was going to get into this whole Linux thing, but I'm going back to my stable Windows environment.
If you want the "console experience", use an emulator and grab a few ROM's. They actually have torrents that compile every SNES and NES ROM ever made.
Back in the day, you used to have to do something innovative to get a patent...
Common sense would also say - that ebay wants to make as much money from everyone they can.
Why don't we start shooting nukes into space? No seriously hear me out on this. First, we may accidently divert a near earth object. and second, if aliens come around to suck out our atmosphere, they may just pass right on through to the next planet (They don't want none of this.)
New Jersey - you mean the armpit of America, right?
I agree that it has a lot to do with personifying animals, but I think it hardly has anything to do with Hollywood. Most of the civilized world finds eating dogs disgusting, while other countries see no problem with it. Is it really so different? probably not, but these animals are pets in the rest of the world which might be the reason for our hesitation. We see human-like qualities in them.
But I think you missed my point - Since the majority of people will never see food on a farm, we are thereby divorced from our source of food. Which, in turn, makes me wonder how we can place any kind of personification on any of these animals, or, at least, any more than people who actually worked on farms.
Agreed - but since we have these social norms now that divorces us from our food supply. Doesn't it seem strange that we ACTUALLY care about these animals? It would seem to me that the old addage "out of sight, out of mind" would apply. I, myself, have toiled in vegetarianism, and personally, I think it's great if they can find an alternative to meat - especially because there will be more alternatives. I mean lets face it, I think most of us can agree that the kind of hardships these animals endure before being butchered is just a bit ridiculous.