The only cost here (besides the book) is the hardware. Even if the "less than any windows install with AV" statement was inaccurate, it is still a hell of a lot cheaper.
Re:your first sentence is technically flawed
on
Ubuntu on a Dime
·
· Score: 1
As to Xenix , you had "UNIX" with all the stability and security of DOS.
At least it didn't have the fundamental lack of functionality that DOS had.
I trust you do all of your programming in BrainFuck right?
Face it, even if any Turing complete language can do what any other Turing complete language can do, sometimes there are write languages for the job, and sometimes there are wrong languages for the job.
They aren't gallows, simply a crude wooden frame built for the purpose of hanging from the neck until dead. As such, this image also qualifies as an image of a brutal torture killing.
Authors can chose to release works into the public domain ahead of time, and sometimes things fall through the cracks, even though they are not all that old (see 'Night of the Living Dead').
I've spent plenty of time studying the prevailing theories, and I am not yet suitably convinced that things fall to the ground because of gravity, despite the best efforts of gravity missionaries to convert me. There simply isn't enough evidence at this point to make such a conclusive statement. There are plenty of theorists claiming that is so, but as with all science, theories are simply explanations someone cooked up that haven't yet been disproved. As has happened in many generations past, all of the scientific knowledge that we now have could one day be replaced by something that is found to be more accurate.
Fixed that for you. You see, the real problem is people like you who don't actually know what the word "theory" means in a scientific context. Ever hear of the theory of gravity?
Fuck that meatbag Christopher Columbus. They should have sent probes instead.
You know what is absolutely terrible for getting public funding? Doing boring, un-inspiring stuff. If you want real money for a space program, you need to give the public a reason to look at your work with a sense of awe. You are thinking like a good engineer, but you're missing part of the picture because of it.
45MPH? I regularly do 80MPH on roads like that, and have never once gotten pulled over or in an accident. The trick to safe driving speeds isn't going slow, it's going the same speed as everybody else, I don't see why politicians don't get this.
How do you even get around with 36MPH speed limits though? Australia isn't exactly a small country...
Pardon my ignorance, I'm not from Australia and am not completely familiar with all of their customs, but what is so conservative nationalist about "life savers are an icon here in oz"? Lifeguards (that is what life savers are, right?) provide a very valuable service and I hardly see anything political about them. Is "oz" conservative nationalist then?
If you have the technical know-how and resources to set up an external proxy, and it works for getting you to youtube, how exactly would it not work for getting you to other more controversial websites? Do they do deep packet inspection to manually verify that every image you load is not pornography?
He says that this is a business model, not the only business model. He has described and advocated numerous others in the past as well, and supports more traditional business models based around Free software such as the one used by Redhat. You may have RTFA, but you clearly have not read Stallman's fucking essays.
Sonar isn't bad for anything, numerous types of sea life actually use it themselves.
Sonar at sufficiently high power levels is supposed to be bad for marine life (in particular, I think it is generally stated that it is bad for mammals). If the cod were attracted to the sonar, I think it would indicate that the sonar was not powerful enough to actually cause damage to the cod (if in fact cod can be damaged by sonar).
I'd say that by "paying money for a piece of hardware", he probably meant "buying". I don't think anyone supports unlimited rights with rented hardware, that'd be like renting a car then spraypainting flames painted on the side. The car rental agency would quite clearly have a reason to be pissed;)
The difference between a system like ShotSpotter and a full CCTV system may be a large one technologically, but politically it is very very small. All it takes is for one go-getter politician to say "well we could have caught the criminal, but unfortunately footage from after the incident only painted a partial picture."
The above paragraph is an opinion, not a statement of fact. It happens to be an opinion that I hold, and you are free to disagree with it if you chose to do so. You will find that often-times on the internet, there will be people that hold different opinions than you. This is something you should learn to deal with.
Concerns that you do not personally share cannot be blindly written off as attempts to derail the conversation. The potential societal impact of installing a system like ShotSpotter is very much relevant. If you disagree, you may feel free to excuse yourself from this aspect of the discussion, or even moderate it 'Offtopic' if you happen to have modpoints. Nobody is compelling you to participate.
Telling people to "shut the fuck up" is far more destructive to the conversation than anything you are complaining about. If you can't act maturely, expect to be ignored by the adults here. I will be doing so in the future.
As I stated before, you have no expectation of privacy in a public place
this is about the government getting once step closer to forming a police state. This is about the progressive destruction of presumption of innocence.
If you are going to be abusive and not even bother reading what others have to say, then you should shut the fuck up. Quit being abusive and try to read what people have to say, you might just hear something new.
I'm not saying these systems create a police state, I'm saying that unopposed installation of these systems is a step towards a police state. After the ShotSpotter installations, full blown London style CCTV is only a small step away. Once we have CCTV cameras on every corner, it's another small step until we start doing facial recognition to start tracking individuals from camera to camera. Once we have that system set up, it's only yet another small step until we tie that system into a wanted fugitive database, and another step before we start logging all of the data for everyone, just in case. Every step of the way we will hear cries about how "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about", and "if you are in the public, you have no right to privacy."
Comparing CCTV coverage and citizen tracking systems to "just more police on the street" is bogus. Police on regular patrol duty don't track and log your movements for later.
PS. Someone disagreeing with you is not a "red herring". I know that is a fun new term you just learned in debate class 101, but you using it improperly whenever you don't feel like actually making a good counter argument does nothing but hurt you. These are not deliberate attempts to derail the conversation, these are things people actually feel about this sort of thing. Or do you think everyone that opposes this stuff is actually some gang-banger who just doesn't want to get caught?
Why? Because to some of us, some things are more important than safety.
Please explain why we shouldn't strip search every single air passenger, if it could help stop a single terrorist incident? The government is manipulating you with fear, and some of us have had enough of it already. This just about privacy, this is about the government getting once step closer to forming a police state. This is about the progressive destruction of presumption of innocence.
In some religions they have a concept of hell, but people are not supposed to go to it after they die until some date much further in the future. Someone coming back from the brink and reporting this wouldn't reinforce the story.
Every time I say I don't understand the point of the ipad, I only get told that I'm "not supposed to" because I'm clearly not the target audience. That is bullshit.
I don't buy convertibles, but I see why people would. I don't have cable (or a TV), but I can see why others enjoy it. Hell, I don't play with dolls, but I can understand why young people do. I've yet to hear why anyone is actually supposed to like this thing.
Criticism is only met with "well it's not meant for you".
Slashdot Mirror
Just about any linux install: $0.00
The only cost here (besides the book) is the hardware. Even if the "less than any windows install with AV" statement was inaccurate, it is still a hell of a lot cheaper.
At least it didn't have the fundamental lack of functionality that DOS had.
Basically? That is exactly what you are doing. That is the whole point...
I trust you do all of your programming in BrainFuck right?
Face it, even if any Turing complete language can do what any other Turing complete language can do, sometimes there are write languages for the job, and sometimes there are wrong languages for the job.
They aren't gallows, simply a crude wooden frame built for the purpose of hanging from the neck until dead. As such, this image also qualifies as an image of a brutal torture killing.
In the movies maybe.
Just about anything Disney for that matter. It's not nearly as blatant as the stuff they have in Japan though...
Good programmers should always be able to speak/write both fluently.
Authors can chose to release works into the public domain ahead of time, and sometimes things fall through the cracks, even though they are not all that old (see 'Night of the Living Dead').
If I had to google that, does that mean I get to keep mine?
Fixed that for you. You see, the real problem is people like you who don't actually know what the word "theory" means in a scientific context. Ever hear of the theory of gravity?
Fuck that meatbag Christopher Columbus. They should have sent probes instead.
You know what is absolutely terrible for getting public funding? Doing boring, un-inspiring stuff. If you want real money for a space program, you need to give the public a reason to look at your work with a sense of awe. You are thinking like a good engineer, but you're missing part of the picture because of it.
45MPH? I regularly do 80MPH on roads like that, and have never once gotten pulled over or in an accident. The trick to safe driving speeds isn't going slow, it's going the same speed as everybody else, I don't see why politicians don't get this.
How do you even get around with 36MPH speed limits though? Australia isn't exactly a small country...
Pardon my ignorance, I'm not from Australia and am not completely familiar with all of their customs, but what is so conservative nationalist about "life savers are an icon here in oz"? Lifeguards (that is what life savers are, right?) provide a very valuable service and I hardly see anything political about them. Is "oz" conservative nationalist then?
If you have the technical know-how and resources to set up an external proxy, and it works for getting you to youtube, how exactly would it not work for getting you to other more controversial websites? Do they do deep packet inspection to manually verify that every image you load is not pornography?
He says that this is a business model, not the only business model. He has described and advocated numerous others in the past as well, and supports more traditional business models based around Free software such as the one used by Redhat. You may have RTFA, but you clearly have not read Stallman's fucking essays.
Sonar isn't bad for anything, numerous types of sea life actually use it themselves.
Sonar at sufficiently high power levels is supposed to be bad for marine life (in particular, I think it is generally stated that it is bad for mammals). If the cod were attracted to the sonar, I think it would indicate that the sonar was not powerful enough to actually cause damage to the cod (if in fact cod can be damaged by sonar).
I'd say that by "paying money for a piece of hardware", he probably meant "buying". I don't think anyone supports unlimited rights with rented hardware, that'd be like renting a car then spraypainting flames painted on the side. The car rental agency would quite clearly have a reason to be pissed ;)
The difference between a system like ShotSpotter and a full CCTV system may be a large one technologically, but politically it is very very small. All it takes is for one go-getter politician to say "well we could have caught the criminal, but unfortunately footage from after the incident only painted a partial picture."
The above paragraph is an opinion, not a statement of fact. It happens to be an opinion that I hold, and you are free to disagree with it if you chose to do so. You will find that often-times on the internet, there will be people that hold different opinions than you. This is something you should learn to deal with.
Concerns that you do not personally share cannot be blindly written off as attempts to derail the conversation. The potential societal impact of installing a system like ShotSpotter is very much relevant. If you disagree, you may feel free to excuse yourself from this aspect of the discussion, or even moderate it 'Offtopic' if you happen to have modpoints. Nobody is compelling you to participate.
Telling people to "shut the fuck up" is far more destructive to the conversation than anything you are complaining about. If you can't act maturely, expect to be ignored by the adults here. I will be doing so in the future.
If you are going to be abusive and not even bother reading what others have to say, then you should shut the fuck up. Quit being abusive and try to read what people have to say, you might just hear something new.
I'm not saying these systems create a police state, I'm saying that unopposed installation of these systems is a step towards a police state. After the ShotSpotter installations, full blown London style CCTV is only a small step away. Once we have CCTV cameras on every corner, it's another small step until we start doing facial recognition to start tracking individuals from camera to camera. Once we have that system set up, it's only yet another small step until we tie that system into a wanted fugitive database, and another step before we start logging all of the data for everyone, just in case. Every step of the way we will hear cries about how "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about", and "if you are in the public, you have no right to privacy."
Comparing CCTV coverage and citizen tracking systems to "just more police on the street" is bogus. Police on regular patrol duty don't track and log your movements for later.
PS. Someone disagreeing with you is not a "red herring". I know that is a fun new term you just learned in debate class 101, but you using it improperly whenever you don't feel like actually making a good counter argument does nothing but hurt you. These are not deliberate attempts to derail the conversation, these are things people actually feel about this sort of thing. Or do you think everyone that opposes this stuff is actually some gang-banger who just doesn't want to get caught?
Why? Because to some of us, some things are more important than safety.
Please explain why we shouldn't strip search every single air passenger, if it could help stop a single terrorist incident? The government is manipulating you with fear, and some of us have had enough of it already. This just about privacy, this is about the government getting once step closer to forming a police state. This is about the progressive destruction of presumption of innocence.
$20 per resident? Well at that price we could almost just inject GPS trackers under the skin of everyone!
In some religions they have a concept of hell, but people are not supposed to go to it after they die until some date much further in the future. Someone coming back from the brink and reporting this wouldn't reinforce the story.
Every time I say I don't understand the point of the ipad, I only get told that I'm "not supposed to" because I'm clearly not the target audience. That is bullshit.
I don't buy convertibles, but I see why people would. I don't have cable (or a TV), but I can see why others enjoy it. Hell, I don't play with dolls, but I can understand why young people do. I've yet to hear why anyone is actually supposed to like this thing.
Criticism is only met with "well it's not meant for you".
And if I had modpoints, I'd mod you troll! Amazing!