Well, those are the government's cameras, so they presumably can turn them off when they want to.
But, as far as I know, it's not illegal (yet) for private citizens to own cameras and use them. Where are your cameras? Why isn't there some effort to provide private camera coverage of these demonstrations?
If the opponents of a protest are smarter and better prepared than you, then who is really to blame? I know that organizing demonstrators can be like herding cats, but somebody has to think of these things and get the counter-surveilance implemented.
How can you say that future generations will not look on the US Army as terrorists? Can you look a hundred years in the future and say it will be the same then as it is now?
Because a terrorist has a certain definition that the current US military does not meet. They may consider us many things, and they may disapprove of things we did, but they will not have a basis for calling us terrorists.
At the time of the US War of Independance the Brits certainly thought of the Colonialists of Rebels and terrorists and yet now you claim they were in the right?
Do you have a source for this? The Brits definitely thought bad things about us. We fought in an unconventional style. Certain renegade bands dumped tea in a harbor. But the Continental Army fought in uniform, gave quarter to the enemy, and did not attack civilians.
As for the Wishy Washy statement? WTF is that about?
It's wishy-washy because your claims rely on a notion that terrorist is undefined and indistinguishable from soldier. Anything can be proven if definitions are as fluid as you think they are.
Please note: I am not saying that the US military will escape all criticism. I am saying that criticising them as terrorists is wrong, past present or future. There are other criticisms that might apply.
This is not an emotional argument for me. Don't take anything I am saying as an attack. I am merely providing and clarifying a definition, and pointing out how it applies in various historical contexts.
It's about having navigation links on all the pages of a site that don't change, but part of the page does change. For an example of this, see slashdot.org where there's a list of links on the left side, but the rest of the content changes. CNN does the same thing.
I'm the owner of www.pdrap.org and I'm offended that I am not listed in your database. I suggest that you put me in the category of "subversive liberal" but if you don't have a match for that, then pornography or foul language will do. Thanks.
It seems that a lot of people are not aware of the distinction between a terrorist and a soldier. It doesn't have much to do with how they are regarded back home. If the Free Aceh movement targets civilians specifically and do not fight according to a code of honor, they are terrorists.
I don't see how I could have proved your viewpoint, since it was originally very wishy-washy "are they terrorists and freedom fighters?" You're still wishy-washy, because you rely on the fact that the code of honor changes over time.
Future generations are NOT likely to look back at the current US Army as a terrorist group, because they meet none of the definitions of terrorism. The distinction between a terrorist and a soldier does not rest on a historical viewpoint at all, but on distict criteria that can be answered with yes or no questions.
We may be condemned in the future for our actions today, but it will not be because we were terrorists.
Obviously terrorism by today's standards, and some thought the same even back then, but not enough. The law of warfare and our social values have increased a lot since then.
But, I detect that you were just trolling me. Did you expect me to answer differently? Strangely enough, I get confused either as a hyper-liberal at some times, and as a neoconservative at other times. I'm just wondering what you guessed I might be, that's all.
I don't know about the definition of "freedom fighter" but a terrorist is different than a soldier, which is the basic argument that is going on here. The difference is that soldiers fight according to a code of conduct (code of honor) and within the rules of lawful warfare.
Soldiers are required to fight legally and that means giving quarter to the enemy when they are surrendering, avoiding the deaths of civilians if at all possible, fighting in uniform, etc. When soldiers break these rules, they can and are tried for war crimes. They can serve time in jail. And, they suffer loss of honor, and are not considered to be honorable soldiers by their families and countrymen. They are given dishonorable discharges from the service.
A terrorist follows none of these rules. They target civilians. They kill unnecessarily and without regard to the combatant status. They are actively using any means necessary to destroy targets, and they do not live and die by a code of honor. They do not fight in uniforms, but use the civilians around them as protection and subterfuge.
All sorts of guerilla movements are terrorist movements, and calling them freedom fighters doesn't distinguish them properly. The question to be asking is are they terrorists or soldiers?
Hamas and the PLO: terrorists. They target civilians. IRA or Protestant forces: terrorists. They target civilians. Free Aceh: terrorists. They target civilians. Indonesian Army: also terrorist. They have targeted non-combatants. United States Continental Army: soldiers. They targeted Redcoats, not civilians.
I was the only person to run it too. I first installed Linux back in 1993, and except for the basic kernel and compiler (which were SLS) I manually tracked down the sources to everything I needed and compiled it myself. I kept everything up to date by myself, and even went through some standard library changes, and the big move to the ELF executable format. I had networking, and X running twm very well on my 386SX. When I switched computers, I'd just make a boot disk, make a filesystem, move a big tarball from one machine to the other with floppies, untar it, and reconfigure everything by hand. I learned so much about how UNIX works in those years, but it eventually became too much work to keep it all running. I was spending most of my time tracking down sources, compiling, installing, and configuring my machine.
So, I installed Red Hat 4.0 and later moved to Debian. I'd recommend that everyone should have the opportunity to build a linux system from scratch, even if it's just a fairly simple single floppy boot disk distribution. Get the kernel and filesystem installed. Build init from sources on another machine. Download a prebuild gcc compiler from the net, and the sources to gcc, and build a stage two compiler and install it. Get the XFree86 sources and compile them. Same goes for xterm and the other utilities.
This is a much different experience than installing Red Hat, or Slackware, or Gentoo, and I promise you'll learn a lot and have fun at the same time.
I'd even have it set so that the lawyer gets 100%. All I want is for the spam to stop. If a lawyer can successfully sue a spammer on behalf of a client, I'd consider that money WELL earned, and the lawyer would deserve all of it. I'm not anti-lawyer. There's quite a lot of really great ones out there, good people. When they work hard and do a good thing, it's a good thing for them to make money at it.
Write once Run everywhere is a good thing, right? I hope we can all agree on that, after the world's mostly positive experience with Java and a virtual machine providing portability.
We might not get all the way to perfect portability with compatibility libraries, but we can get most of the way there. And the trouble is worth it because the compatibility library can run at full speed on every platform.
We've got to get over the thinking that any particular Windows API must only be run on Windows. Are we just as opposed to running a POSIX program on a Windows machine? Of course not.
When APIs are available on more than one machine, it provides portability and inproves freedom of choice. As a principle, we all think that freedom to choose is an important one, and anything that increases that freedom is a good thing. That's why I see running a Windows binary on a Linux OS as a good thing.
Well then, that's completely fine with me. Obviously, their parents WANT their children to play these games and who am I tell tell another parent that they can't let their kids play these games? I mean, this is parent's rights! Right?
Parents have the right to watch their own little monsters. They do not have the right to tell others that certain games are evil just because they can't control their kids.
Most gamers are men in their 30's who actually make a decent amount of money at their job.
The pimply faced gamer is something of a myth. They can't afford games and the computers to play them for the most part.
When you looked at the game, it was probably obvious to you that it wasn't meant for girls to play. So then, why is it not just as obvious that it's not something for a child to play? Seems like if you noticed one thing, you would have noticed the other, right?
"Thou shalt covet no laptop other than an IBM Thinkpad."
I'm on my third Thinkpad, an A21m. I use it everyday for work, no problems whatsoever. I still have my other two thinkpads - a 365cs (486SX/33 with 12 megs RAM) and an i1450 (Pentium 266/ 64 megs RAM), and both still work perfectly.
And trust me, when you unwrap a Thinkpad you get that "I just bought a Mercedes" feeling.
You have just posted the most useful benchmark in the world to me. I don't care about Unreal, or winstones, or whatever. I run a compiler on my machine and that's it. The make world test is the one I care about.
Can you post what the total make world time on your machine is? You only mentioned that it was 10 minutes faster.
Copying music to RWCD was already fine, and it was free before.
What's next? An air tax? To pay for the air that you will breath? And will someone say "OK, now breathing is fine, because you have already payed."
And the answer is...
on
SSH or IPSec?
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
ssh.
As a consultant I've had to work with different remote access solutions, and everything except for ssh is a huge pain in the ass. Some of them don't work with anything but Windows, and most of them are too complicated for a large organization to figure out. If you're a big company and you don't want to frustrate your users, go with ssh. Otherwise, you're going to condemn everyone who wants to get hooked up to at least 4 weeks of phone call support hell.
Make an attack tree. All it takes is pencil and paper.
For my home network, it's pretty simple. Just me and a few computers, and few assets to protect. One of the trees might be how people might steal my pr0n collection. No big deal.
Once you have your attack trees written out, then you secure and document how you secure against each and every one of the attacks. For my pr0n collection, it comes down to 1) locking the front door and windows to my house 2) setting the burglar alarm 3) running a firewall 4) keeping my software up to date 5) having an offsite backup, encrypted with a trusted method. My pr0n is reasonably safe from being stolen. Notice how my attack tree has some physical attacks in there, thus the listing of good door locks in the security actions?
This article has been up now for 5 hours and... I get first post?
Anyway, should be a good book. I imagine that it's quite a few people's fantasy to write a neat game, sell it, and drive Ferrari's for the rest of thy days.
Remember that the moon's color is very very dark. It reflects less light than a black chalkboard. Think about how bright it looks, and realize just how bright sunlight is in space.
I've taken eclipse exposures, and I can concur with the other article. You don't need long exposures, but you do need a nice long lens if you've got it.
Ever wonder why the poor people live by the railroad tracks? Do you suppose that it's the railroad tracks that cause poverty?
Nobody wants a high voltage wire in the backyard because they are ugly. If they have enough money, they avoid it. Those that can't, well, they're poor. And it just so happens that poor people get cancer more often than rich people.
I think that the power wire example should be required reading for everyone on how easy it is to assume that correlation means causation, and how easy it is to get the direction of the causation wrong too.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, those are the government's cameras, so they presumably can turn them off when they want to.
But, as far as I know, it's not illegal (yet) for private citizens to own cameras and use them. Where are your cameras? Why isn't there some effort to provide private camera coverage of these demonstrations?
If the opponents of a protest are smarter and better prepared than you, then who is really to blame? I know that organizing demonstrators can be like herding cats, but somebody has to think of these things and get the counter-surveilance implemented.
How can you say that future generations will not look on the US Army as terrorists? Can you look a hundred years in the future and say it will be the same then as it is now?
Because a terrorist has a certain definition that the current US military does not meet. They may consider us many things, and they may disapprove of things we did, but they will not have a basis for calling us terrorists.
At the time of the US War of Independance the Brits certainly thought of the Colonialists of Rebels and terrorists and yet now you claim they were in the right?
Do you have a source for this? The Brits definitely thought bad things about us. We fought in an unconventional style. Certain renegade bands dumped tea in a harbor. But the Continental Army fought in uniform, gave quarter to the enemy, and did not attack civilians.
As for the Wishy Washy statement? WTF is that about?
It's wishy-washy because your claims rely on a notion that terrorist is undefined and indistinguishable from soldier. Anything can be proven if definitions are as fluid as you think they are.
Please note: I am not saying that the US military will escape all criticism. I am saying that criticising them as terrorists is wrong, past present or future. There are other criticisms that might apply.
This is not an emotional argument for me. Don't take anything I am saying as an attack. I am merely providing and clarifying a definition, and pointing out how it applies in various historical contexts.
Overcooked dog-doo
Ohhhh as far as I'm concerned, you just can't cook dog-doo enough.
It's about having navigation links on all the pages of a site that don't change, but part of the page does change. For an example of this, see slashdot.org where there's a list of links on the left side, but the rest of the content changes. CNN does the same thing.
This patent is evil.
I'm the owner of www.pdrap.org and I'm offended that I am not listed in your database. I suggest that you put me in the category of "subversive liberal" but if you don't have a match for that, then pornography or foul language will do. Thanks.
It seems that a lot of people are not aware of the distinction between a terrorist and a soldier. It doesn't have much to do with how they are regarded back home. If the Free Aceh movement targets civilians specifically and do not fight according to a code of honor, they are terrorists.
I don't see how I could have proved your viewpoint, since it was originally very wishy-washy "are they terrorists and freedom fighters?" You're still wishy-washy, because you rely on the fact that the code of honor changes over time.
Future generations are NOT likely to look back at the current US Army as a terrorist group, because they meet none of the definitions of terrorism. The distinction between a terrorist and a soldier does not rest on a historical viewpoint at all, but on distict criteria that can be answered with yes or no questions.
We may be condemned in the future for our actions today, but it will not be because we were terrorists.
Obviously terrorism by today's standards, and some thought the same even back then, but not enough. The law of warfare and our social values have increased a lot since then.
But, I detect that you were just trolling me. Did you expect me to answer differently? Strangely enough, I get confused either as a hyper-liberal at some times, and as a neoconservative at other times. I'm just wondering what you guessed I might be, that's all.
So why take it out on me if the moderators don't agree? For fucks sake man.
I don't know about the definition of "freedom fighter" but a terrorist is different than a soldier, which is the basic argument that is going on here. The difference is that soldiers fight according to a code of conduct (code of honor) and within the rules of lawful warfare.
See The Law of Land Warfare and other sources from Google searches.
Soldiers are required to fight legally and that means giving quarter to the enemy when they are surrendering, avoiding the deaths of civilians if at all possible, fighting in uniform, etc. When soldiers break these rules, they can and are tried for war crimes. They can serve time in jail. And, they suffer loss of honor, and are not considered to be honorable soldiers by their families and countrymen. They are given dishonorable discharges from the service.
A terrorist follows none of these rules. They target civilians. They kill unnecessarily and without regard to the combatant status. They are actively using any means necessary to destroy targets, and they do not live and die by a code of honor. They do not fight in uniforms, but use the civilians around them as protection and subterfuge.
All sorts of guerilla movements are terrorist movements, and calling them freedom fighters doesn't distinguish them properly. The question to be asking is are they terrorists or soldiers?
Hamas and the PLO: terrorists. They target civilians.
IRA or Protestant forces: terrorists. They target civilians.
Free Aceh: terrorists. They target civilians.
Indonesian Army: also terrorist. They have targeted non-combatants.
United States Continental Army: soldiers. They targeted Redcoats, not civilians.
And this comes from a paintball geek? bwahahaha
I'm married anyway. If I took a girl on a date I'd be in deep shit.
I was the only person to run it too. I first installed Linux back in 1993, and except for the basic kernel and compiler (which were SLS) I manually tracked down the sources to everything I needed and compiled it myself. I kept everything up to date by myself, and even went through some standard library changes, and the big move to the ELF executable format. I had networking, and X running twm very well on my 386SX. When I switched computers, I'd just make a boot disk, make a filesystem, move a big tarball from one machine to the other with floppies, untar it, and reconfigure everything by hand. I learned so much about how UNIX works in those years, but it eventually became too much work to keep it all running. I was spending most of my time tracking down sources, compiling, installing, and configuring my machine.
So, I installed Red Hat 4.0 and later moved to Debian. I'd recommend that everyone should have the opportunity to build a linux system from scratch, even if it's just a fairly simple single floppy boot disk distribution. Get the kernel and filesystem installed. Build init from sources on another machine. Download a prebuild gcc compiler from the net, and the sources to gcc, and build a stage two compiler and install it. Get the XFree86 sources and compile them. Same goes for xterm and the other utilities.
This is a much different experience than installing Red Hat, or Slackware, or Gentoo, and I promise you'll learn a lot and have fun at the same time.
I'd even have it set so that the lawyer gets 100%. All I want is for the spam to stop. If a lawyer can successfully sue a spammer on behalf of a client, I'd consider that money WELL earned, and the lawyer would deserve all of it. I'm not anti-lawyer. There's quite a lot of really great ones out there, good people. When they work hard and do a good thing, it's a good thing for them to make money at it.
Write once Run everywhere is a good thing, right? I hope we can all agree on that, after the world's mostly positive experience with Java and a virtual machine providing portability.
We might not get all the way to perfect portability with compatibility libraries, but we can get most of the way there. And the trouble is worth it because the compatibility library can run at full speed on every platform.
We've got to get over the thinking that any particular Windows API must only be run on Windows. Are we just as opposed to running a POSIX program on a Windows machine? Of course not.
When APIs are available on more than one machine, it provides portability and inproves freedom of choice. As a principle, we all think that freedom to choose is an important one, and anything that increases that freedom is a good thing. That's why I see running a Windows binary on a Linux OS as a good thing.
Well then, that's completely fine with me. Obviously, their parents WANT their children to play these games and who am I tell tell another parent that they can't let their kids play these games? I mean, this is parent's rights! Right?
Parents have the right to watch their own little monsters. They do not have the right to tell others that certain games are evil just because they can't control their kids.
Most gamers are men in their 30's who actually make a decent amount of money at their job.
The pimply faced gamer is something of a myth. They can't afford games and the computers to play them for the most part.
When you looked at the game, it was probably obvious to you that it wasn't meant for girls to play. So then, why is it not just as obvious that it's not something for a child to play? Seems like if you noticed one thing, you would have noticed the other, right?
There's an old law, and it's still a good one.
"Thou shalt covet no laptop other than an IBM Thinkpad."
I'm on my third Thinkpad, an A21m. I use it everyday for work, no problems whatsoever. I still have my other two thinkpads - a 365cs (486SX/33 with 12 megs RAM) and an i1450 (Pentium 266/ 64 megs RAM), and both still work perfectly.
And trust me, when you unwrap a Thinkpad you get that "I just bought a Mercedes" feeling.
You have just posted the most useful benchmark in the world to me. I don't care about Unreal, or winstones, or whatever. I run a compiler on my machine and that's it. The make world test is the one I care about.
Can you post what the total make world time on your machine is? You only mentioned that it was 10 minutes faster.
Copying music to RWCD was already fine, and it was free before.
What's next? An air tax? To pay for the air that you will breath? And will someone say "OK, now breathing is fine, because you have already payed."
ssh.
As a consultant I've had to work with different remote access solutions, and everything except for ssh is a huge pain in the ass. Some of them don't work with anything but Windows, and most of them are too complicated for a large organization to figure out. If you're a big company and you don't want to frustrate your users, go with ssh. Otherwise, you're going to condemn everyone who wants to get hooked up to at least 4 weeks of phone call support hell.
Make an attack tree. All it takes is pencil and paper.
For my home network, it's pretty simple. Just me and a few computers, and few assets to protect. One of the trees might be how people might steal my pr0n collection. No big deal.
Once you have your attack trees written out, then you secure and document how you secure against each and every one of the attacks. For my pr0n collection, it comes down to 1) locking the front door and windows to my house 2) setting the burglar alarm 3) running a firewall 4) keeping my software up to date 5) having an offsite backup, encrypted with a trusted method. My pr0n is reasonably safe from being stolen. Notice how my attack tree has some physical attacks in there, thus the listing of good door locks in the security actions?
The end.
American Greetings...I find your lack of humor ... disturbing.
I watched it too, because my TiVo thoughtfully snagged it for me. Started watching it at midnight. Yawn.
This article has been up now for 5 hours and ... I get first post?
Anyway, should be a good book. I imagine that it's quite a few people's fantasy to write a neat game, sell it, and drive Ferrari's for the rest of thy days.
So, is this a new games section?
Remember that the moon's color is very very dark. It reflects less light than a black chalkboard. Think about how bright it looks, and realize just how bright sunlight is in space.
I've taken eclipse exposures, and I can concur with the other article. You don't need long exposures, but you do need a nice long lens if you've got it.
Ever wonder why the poor people live by the railroad tracks? Do you suppose that it's the railroad tracks that cause poverty?
Nobody wants a high voltage wire in the backyard because they are ugly. If they have enough money, they avoid it. Those that can't, well, they're poor. And it just so happens that poor people get cancer more often than rich people.
I think that the power wire example should be required reading for everyone on how easy it is to assume that correlation means causation, and how easy it is to get the direction of the causation wrong too.