I'm not telling you not to voice your opinion. I'm saying voice your opinion in a constructive manner. Putting people in Jail for what has happened in political office is not constructive. And don't tell me not to voice my opinion.
You just don't get it do you? It's statements like this that burden our court system with frivolous lawsuits, because someone got their feelings hurt, and decided to sue the other party out of existence.
No, this is not the American way. At least it didn't used to be.
Quit whining and try to make a better nation for you, your offspring, and everyone around us.
Yes, wrongs were committed in this administration. Yes, wrongs were committed in every administration since the Washington administration. I defy you to find one that was perfect. Tearing the country apart because other people believe something different than you SOLVES NOTHING. If you throw Bush or one of his major players in jail, you alienate those who support him, and further the divide, causing his supporters to become further polarized away from you and your viewpoint.
Whining only serves to draw you attention, but doesn't actually accomplish anything.
This is exactly the kind of rhetoric about which I'm speaking. Fighting a perceived wrong with another wrong will only serve to further damage the country. Whatever happened to taking the moral high ground, and not stooping to the level of an opponent which commits acts that you despise? Revenge benefits no one. Tone down the rhetoric, let's move forward.
I'm not pointing fingers at one side or the other here. I know the Republicans have done their fair share of grandstanding, and they're just as guilty as polarizing the country as the liberals, no questions asked. My point was, we need to stop the polarization of the country, or we WILL see blood in the streets.
Balance is a good thing, and I just hope that the act of balancing doesn't cause more polarization than it fixes. And the left has been spewing a LOT of bitterness, that's why I'm worried about the polarization of the Nation.
Nope, I actually had broken my finger, and couldn't shove it down my throat far enough, but yea, then too. I'm just sick of politics in general. So sick that I want to get into them myself, and show people how it's done. Problem is, my politics wouldn't get me elected (opposing the base of both parties tends to alienate your funding sources pretty quickly).
Yep, them too. Just do your constitutionally appointed duties, and quit whining. No matter what party you're in. And, knock off the negative advertisement already.
This is the post election anger I feel every election year. Ugh. I'm trying to avoid it, it's just so difficult to stay away from!!!
Okay, look. I'm not in with the current administration either, but statistically, in the 6th year midterm elections of ANY presidency, the ruling party typically loses seats in both the house and the senate.
If I hear any more god damned grandstanding from the winners, I'm going to puke. Win with dignity, or this country is going to polarize it self so much further, only bloodshed will solve it.
Well, take a step back. Though we are a self aware species (aren't we?), does not mean that everything we do to preserve ourselves qualifies as "circumventing natural selection". I'd actually argue the contrary, that we've evolved to a higher state, in that we're attempting to assist our fellow "species-mates", and enhance their survival rates. Isn't that pretty much evolution right there?
Ants (and lots of other hive insects) work just like this, individuals cannot survive without the group, but as a group they thrive! Survival of the fittest doesn't always imply fittest individual.
And they prevent employees from writing crapp code, how?
The discussion isn't about preventing crap code, actually (at least from what I've read today). It's about keeping the code secure from outside espionage, malicious entries by foreign entities, and the like. To prevent authoring of bad code, you'll have to stop writing code altogether. For every good programmer, there's probably 10 to 15 average ones, and for every average coder, there's probably 25 - 30 crappy ones. You really can't prevent this, onshore, offshore, in house, or outhouse. But what you can do is make the process more accountable by only hiring people that are deemed trustworthy, and have proven so in their backgrounds.
So Canadians, French, Japanese, are "foxes", and Americans are all "hens"? I don't get the analogy here.
Pretty much, yea. Foxes eat chickens, and when you put one in a chicken coup, it's like unleashing fatty mcfatcakes on the all you can eat buffet. You provide a foreign entity with the ability to exploit the weakness of another, someone will do it. And, since we don't control the background investigations (nor should we) of the Canadians, French, or Japanese, we cannot wholly trust their personnel. What's to say that the French (or whomever) security clearance requirements are not easier to circumvent than ours? If so, then the enemy attempting to infiltrate our systems will more readily do so through the French side rather than ours. Security is only as strong as its weakest link, and keeping it in house allows you to manage those weak links more effectively.
And to more than just airport officials. Included in this list should be the RIAA, MPAA, large multinational corporations, governments, courts, and just about anyone else attempting to incorrectly influence politics and life in general.
very interesting point, I forgot about that little agreement there. Kinda reinforces the quote from The Way of the Gun, in which one of the characters states something to the effect of "Saying 'trust me' is the mark of a guilty soul".
I know for a fact that the US would grouse very loudly if the roles were reversed. Anyone over there care to start grousing, please?
# first (and maybe most importantly) if we are creating and structuring a defense system for our country, why would we ask others to write the software? Would be outsource our soldiers for the military?
We're not French, and we don't have a foreign legion.
We also have a hard enough time auditing and trusting code developed by corporations (def. contractors) inside the country, where we have complete and total transparency to the application. Why would we change this to make it more difficult?
Do we really suppose that a malicious actor would have that much harder a time getting a job for a DoD contractor in the US than overseas? Do we really suppose that it would be that much more difficult to suborn a programmer overseas than here?
Yes and yes (good word, by the way, had to look up "suborn"). We may not have the man power here to conduct a thorough, line by line audit, but we do have legions of background investigators. And, it's currently illegal for a non-US citizen to hold a security clearance, for good reason (you cannot let the fox into the hen house, after all). It's pretty much a moot point of offshoring work requiring a clearance, as it's illegal. More important to the discussion is the use of off the shelf components in developed software. This is where it gets a little fuzzy. Certain countries can be trusted, some cannot, and, by extension, companies based in those countries are not to be trusted either. Long story short, a lot of redevelopment occurs because offshore vendors are not trusted. It's a good and a bad thing. Costs more, provides Americans with jobs that will not go overseas. Provides level of safety and security by ensuring code is developed by trustworthy people, but shorts out talented programmers overseas.
I mean, seriously, who wants to buy fire control radar components from AlQaeda.com?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not telling you not to voice your opinion. I'm saying voice your opinion in a constructive manner. Putting people in Jail for what has happened in political office is not constructive. And don't tell me not to voice my opinion.
You just don't get it do you? It's statements like this that burden our court system with frivolous lawsuits, because someone got their feelings hurt, and decided to sue the other party out of existence.
No, this is not the American way. At least it didn't used to be.
Quit whining and try to make a better nation for you, your offspring, and everyone around us.
Yes, wrongs were committed in this administration. Yes, wrongs were committed in every administration since the Washington administration. I defy you to find one that was perfect. Tearing the country apart because other people believe something different than you SOLVES NOTHING. If you throw Bush or one of his major players in jail, you alienate those who support him, and further the divide, causing his supporters to become further polarized away from you and your viewpoint.
Whining only serves to draw you attention, but doesn't actually accomplish anything.
This is exactly the kind of rhetoric about which I'm speaking. Fighting a perceived wrong with another wrong will only serve to further damage the country. Whatever happened to taking the moral high ground, and not stooping to the level of an opponent which commits acts that you despise? Revenge benefits no one. Tone down the rhetoric, let's move forward.
I'm not pointing fingers at one side or the other here. I know the Republicans have done their fair share of grandstanding, and they're just as guilty as polarizing the country as the liberals, no questions asked. My point was, we need to stop the polarization of the country, or we WILL see blood in the streets.
Balance is a good thing, and I just hope that the act of balancing doesn't cause more polarization than it fixes. And the left has been spewing a LOT of bitterness, that's why I'm worried about the polarization of the Nation.
Nope, I actually had broken my finger, and couldn't shove it down my throat far enough, but yea, then too. I'm just sick of politics in general. So sick that I want to get into them myself, and show people how it's done. Problem is, my politics wouldn't get me elected (opposing the base of both parties tends to alienate your funding sources pretty quickly).
Yep, them too. Just do your constitutionally appointed duties, and quit whining. No matter what party you're in. And, knock off the negative advertisement already.
This is the post election anger I feel every election year. Ugh. I'm trying to avoid it, it's just so difficult to stay away from!!!
Okay, look. I'm not in with the current administration either, but statistically, in the 6th year midterm elections of ANY presidency, the ruling party typically loses seats in both the house and the senate.
If I hear any more god damned grandstanding from the winners, I'm going to puke. Win with dignity, or this country is going to polarize it self so much further, only bloodshed will solve it.
Why is that a guy with the last name of "Salter" is inventing desalinization tools? Anybody?
Well, take a step back. Though we are a self aware species (aren't we?), does not mean that everything we do to preserve ourselves qualifies as "circumventing natural selection". I'd actually argue the contrary, that we've evolved to a higher state, in that we're attempting to assist our fellow "species-mates", and enhance their survival rates. Isn't that pretty much evolution right there?
Ants (and lots of other hive insects) work just like this, individuals cannot survive without the group, but as a group they thrive! Survival of the fittest doesn't always imply fittest individual.
Ahh, but does the pope shit in the woods? (sorry Mr. Lebowski!)
Yep, just put the Macaroni in the microwave, and, boom! Dinner :)
try http://www.bugmenot.com/, and enter www.nytimes.com into the list. The first one I tried worked.
Wait, so does this mean that when Grandma keeps the thermostat at 150F at the nursing home, she's actually trying to kill herself? WHY GRANDMA, WHY?
Stupid lack of mod points!!! AUGGGHHHH!!! that was hilarious! C'mon mods! Cosine? Obtuse? Tangent? bwhahahahahaha!
Here ya go: Sodium (boils at 882.9 C) and
Mercury (boils at 356.58 C)
Daedalus Club... that's like the Red Carpet Club for interplanetary travel, right?
The discussion isn't about preventing crap code, actually (at least from what I've read today). It's about keeping the code secure from outside espionage, malicious entries by foreign entities, and the like. To prevent authoring of bad code, you'll have to stop writing code altogether. For every good programmer, there's probably 10 to 15 average ones, and for every average coder, there's probably 25 - 30 crappy ones. You really can't prevent this, onshore, offshore, in house, or outhouse. But what you can do is make the process more accountable by only hiring people that are deemed trustworthy, and have proven so in their backgrounds.
Pretty much, yea. Foxes eat chickens, and when you put one in a chicken coup, it's like unleashing fatty mcfatcakes on the all you can eat buffet. You provide a foreign entity with the ability to exploit the weakness of another, someone will do it. And, since we don't control the background investigations (nor should we) of the Canadians, French, or Japanese, we cannot wholly trust their personnel. What's to say that the French (or whomever) security clearance requirements are not easier to circumvent than ours? If so, then the enemy attempting to infiltrate our systems will more readily do so through the French side rather than ours. Security is only as strong as its weakest link, and keeping it in house allows you to manage those weak links more effectively.
Coffee? I for one welcome overpriced Starbucks, with an extra "Airport Maintenance Fee"!
And to more than just airport officials. Included in this list should be the RIAA, MPAA, large multinational corporations, governments, courts, and just about anyone else attempting to incorrectly influence politics and life in general.
Agreed, but this is a totally separate issue. The DoD, thank god, does not control election software.
Minesweeper? Come on!!! that one's a gimme for naval vessels! How else are they going to go out and find the mines?
very interesting point, I forgot about that little agreement there. Kinda reinforces the quote from The Way of the Gun, in which one of the characters states something to the effect of "Saying 'trust me' is the mark of a guilty soul".
I know for a fact that the US would grouse very loudly if the roles were reversed. Anyone over there care to start grousing, please?
We're not French, and we don't have a foreign legion.
We also have a hard enough time auditing and trusting code developed by corporations (def. contractors) inside the country, where we have complete and total transparency to the application. Why would we change this to make it more difficult?
Yes and yes (good word, by the way, had to look up "suborn"). We may not have the man power here to conduct a thorough, line by line audit, but we do have legions of background investigators. And, it's currently illegal for a non-US citizen to hold a security clearance, for good reason (you cannot let the fox into the hen house, after all). It's pretty much a moot point of offshoring work requiring a clearance, as it's illegal. More important to the discussion is the use of off the shelf components in developed software. This is where it gets a little fuzzy. Certain countries can be trusted, some cannot, and, by extension, companies based in those countries are not to be trusted either. Long story short, a lot of redevelopment occurs because offshore vendors are not trusted. It's a good and a bad thing. Costs more, provides Americans with jobs that will not go overseas. Provides level of safety and security by ensuring code is developed by trustworthy people, but shorts out talented programmers overseas.
I mean, seriously, who wants to buy fire control radar components from AlQaeda.com?