I would be absolutely shocked if any water treatment facility was actually testing the isotope composition of their water on a regular basis.
In fact, the only way I wouldn't be shocked, would be if the governor or someone else high in state politics or the water resource authority owned the testing company. In which case, all bets are off.
Ahahahahahahah I totally understand why you would think these things, but, you need a little history.
I worked in Healthcare IT for about 6 years, until a few short months ago. Before that, I actually started my career as a service tech. The thing to realise is...the group I worked in moved out of the office they were in while I was there.... the original office had a room full of chest high benches, with a built in shelf above, and lots of plugs. If this sounds like the kind of setup that would have soldering stations, then you are getting very warm...because that what they used to do!
In fact, some of the same guys I worked with...had been there since core memory that was tacked to the wall was decommed.
That sort of attitude makes perfect sense if you are building a new network, in the total absence of road blocks. A hospital environment however... well.... we are talking about an environment thats been in CONTINUOUS operation since the early 1800s. (not all hospitals are that old, of course) all new equipment, all upgrades, all troubleshooting, all goes on, while operations continue. There is no weekend downtime. There is no middle of the night downtime.... thats just to START.
Add to that the federated 'academic' model that most hospitals use for their budgeting (ask your professors to explain how departments are budgeted and why money gets suddenly spent before the end of the fiscal year, and thats very much like how hospitals work). They started bringing in all this equipment before they even had central IT. They have their own budgets and egos, sometimes bigger departments will have their own mini-IT staff even! It is utter chaos.
Now the departments decide what they want, get most of the way down the path of purchasing it, then bring in IT late in the game. IT fights with them and the vendor about their standards, but can't fight too hard or else they will tell IT to go fuck themselves and just go do it with their own money, since IT can't actually say no. (or they make a stink up to a level where IT gets the smack down)
Then patching and OS upgrades.... often you can't patch or upgrade because the vendor claims they wont support it. Occasionally they blame the FDA saying they certified it on the OS version its on (we often questioned whether that held water).
In short, the vendor and department often act like they are on the same team and IT is the roadblock, rather than the department and IT working as a team. The department, especially if they are clinical, but sometimes research too, has more clout than IT, because the trustees are from the medical professions and they are the final say.
Very early on in my career I got a stack of work orders. First I was told "they can't have windows 95 because their department hasn't been upgraded yet" (and there were internal reasons involving training and federation that meant each dept needed one or two people trained before it could be upgraded).
A week later the hardware arrived and I was told "they are getting Windows 95, OEM build, not ours" (which was a HUGE exception for them)....from that point on, every day I showed up to do something for them based on what we were doing yesterday, and every day they had already had a meeting that I wasn't privy too, and my department had made new concessions to them, totally changing what I was supposed to do..... the ego maniac who was making them do all this, of course, just got mad at me for constantly doing the wrong thing, even though, nobody had told me the plans changed.
Eventually I heard, through more connected people than me, that he had a huge and prestegious grant and was threatening to take his grant and go to another institutiuon if they didn't give him everything he wanted....and he got it.
Now.... tell me how you control what you are using when the final say on policy comes from people who don't understand IT, and are willing to see it as a roadblock rather than part of their team? Believe me when I say there are a lot of people (not everyone of course) who know what they should be doing, and want to do things right, but, they lose a lot of battles.
Yes but, there are consequences. When someone gets shot, investigations happen, people with motive are questioned. Mode of death and circumstances affect alot.
As an example, I have some friends with a farm and a good amount of land behind it. They have a camping ground for events and a number of structures etc in the woods from the many many years of farm and other uses.
They allowed someone that was going through hard times to stay in their woods, living in one of the primitive stuctures. He helped out at the farm, feeding the animals. One day, they noticed the animals hadn't been fed, later on, they went out to check on him.... he had attempted to kill himself, but was still barely alive.
The parametics and police were decidedly unhappy about having to head out into the woods....but did tell my friends that its a really good thing that they found him when they did, because if he had died, and they came to find the dead body, the investigation would have been a very different matter, whereas, since he was (even if just barely) alive when the police arrived, they could just call it an accidental OD or possible suicide and not have to investigate.
Now, if it were a gunshot?... you know they would investigate. However.... guy with a pacemaker has a heart attack? Thats natural causes man.
This could have happened already, many times over, and nobody would be any wiser.... no need to investigate such an "obvious" death.
The chemistry that I learned in high school was pretty damned far from alchemy. However, figuring out lewis diagrams and all that talk about electron orbitals, and the history of the model of the atom definitely made it feel like a lot of applied physics.
A fact which I point out as often as I can to show people that none of those countries deserve to be treated any differently from any other tyranical regiemes, and certainly should, under no circumstances be considered our allies.
Several people have asked my why I "like" obama's facebook page even though I consider him a mass murder (for drone attacks), and have a litany of other issues with him (most of which apply just as well to Mitt, and I have no intention of voting for him either, I consider them equivalent candidates)
The answer was always that....tthere is no dislike button and I can't troll the page without hitting like. That is also why I like a page on the assault weapons ban, not because I favor gun control, but because I want to argue with the people who do.
Meh, and your government probably paid people in other countries to do the same. Not a big deal really....everybody is doing it, then pretending to be surprized when it happens to them. Piece of shit? Only if people within the government work with equivalent shitbags elsewhere.
Frankly, I don't care too much when people do the same to "my country". Damned government doesn't have our interests at heart anyway, why should I care what happens to them and their secrets? Not my problem.
Any sample that is identifiable without using DNA testing is going to have many many cells, or many original copies of the DNA, and there is no reason to assume that they all broke in the same places.
Any one copy of the chromosomes probably no longer contains enough information to uniquely reconstruct the original, but some subset of them may... and since we are potentially talking about many thousands or even millions of original copies (one per cell), I suspect that their DNA can be reconstructed with far more degradation than that.
Jury? as if. Nobody goes in front of a jury anymore.
More likely the prosecutor will sit there, pile on 10 different charges, each of which could land him in jail, then will offer him a much lighter sentance (either jail or parole) if he just confesses.
Most people, even innocent ones, will take that deal. In fact, its been shown that the standard techniques used by police and prosecutors can get confessions up to 90% of the time, regardless of real innocense or guilt.
I am a rider, and I have been through the MSF course, I recommend it.
No he is right, loud pipes most certainly do NOT save lives. Read some of the other comments, they are spot on. The majority of sound is heard right next to or behind the bike, not in front. Also, insulated cars and loud stereos, as you point out, can mostly cancel out bike noise.
Also... the noise is easily loud enough to damage hearing. In fact, motorcycle riders on the highway are advised to wear ear plugs, because even the sound of the wind will damage your ears over time in a full face helmet above 40-50 mph or so (never mind 80 mph:)... thats loud)
What a motorcyclist has however is vision. A riders head rides almost as high as an SUV. He is also small. He has a lot of ability to avoid accidents, using his vision, size, and ability to accelerate.
I mean yes, there is a blind spot.... a good rider stays the fuck out of them and is very mindful of them when it can't be avoided. A good portion of being a good rider in traffic is assuming cars might not see you and riding specifically to increase visibility.
Good riders learn to use lane position to make sure they are seen and keep cars in their space, and make space for escapes. (sometimes you want to practically hug the lines)
Then... they practice evasive moves. A bike is a very agile device, but, if you don't intuitively know what to do, you will do the wrong thing. A lot of riders (a stunning number) don't even know that the bike counter-steers.
The vast majority of motorcycle accidents can be avoided by smart riding and avoiding the situations where a driver not seeing them means they die. That's never a smart bet. Assume they can't see you, make them see you.
> Nolan called his site's decision to post the video 'ethical,' > because 'it is news' but research suggests that graphic > depictions of suicide in the media can spur copycat > suicides, especially among young people, and the World > Health Organization's guidelines warn against > sensationalizing it.
But nothing.... there is no contradiction between those statements. There is nothing unethical about showing people an incident that happened in public, particularly when its news.
Nothing about WHO guidelines or what other people choose to do has any ethical bearing, no matter how much emotional reaction it makes you have. A copycat suicide is 100% on the shoulders of the person who does it, not the person who showed them what they are copying.
Well multiple incidents yes, but theres multiple incidents of everything in a large enough area. Don't get me wrong, gays have had it bad in many ways, but actual murder has been rare.
My assessment is this... most people don't care and never did. In fact, if you look at the few studies on the subject, have found that non-gay males (specifically) fall into two groups. The largest group indicates that other people's gayness is not a big deal to them, whether they approve of it or not. The smaller group has strong negative feelings about gay people, hates them, blames social problems on them etc.
When shown explicit images of gay sexual activity, the first group showed no serious reaction, and did no erection was measured. The second group, the people who really have a problem with homosexuals. Not only did most of them get erections, but in post session interviews, denied it.
One thing I have noticed is that these, violent closed gay homophobes (which I think turns out to be an appropriate term), definitely did seem to teach most people, early on, to at least pretend to dislike homosexuals and reflexively deny being one.
I have met a few people who made comments about how the thought of men having sex disgusted them. As a teenager, I always thought that odd because, being straight myself, the thought of men having sex never crossed my mind at all until someone like him brought it up... even so it was never hard to conjure up the images.... it never really made sense why it bothered them so much. Now, well, it makes a lot more sense.
Anyway, In another post it was said lynching is communication, but its not just to the lynched person, its to anyone who speaks out for them. That goes for many forms of violence, whether the communication is 100% intended or not, that is the message sent, and most people learn fast.
True but, I don't think this applies here. They were not holding violations in reserve, they simply did not know he was violating them. It wasn't until journalists investigated the source of the film, and made the trail back to him and a few accounts that it was known.
Now I don't tend to like the form of these restrictions in general, and don't think this is the sort of thing that should land him in jail....except.... there are other violations.
Its pretty clear that any agreement he had with the actors in the film, each and every one of them, was negotiated in bad faith. He lied to them about the nature of the film being released, at the very least they should have known this and been able to either refuse to have themselves associated with it, or demanded more money due to the risk involved. Smells like fraud to me.
I have a friend who was telling me about an issue at his workplace. They brought in a jerk... possibly not a "brilliant one" but...it hardly matters....
Because his being a jerk actually prompted the two really brilliant researchers who did the core development of their product line leave....
I don't care how brilliant this guy is.... I have a hard time swallowing that he could be so brilliant as to be worth the damage caused by pushing key people out the door.... unless pushing them out the door was the plan... which... while I wont rule out ever being the right move, but, seems unlikely to be.
As a strong tech geek, I tend to get along with the jerks (as long as I don't report to them), but.... that doesn't mean I think they are healthy for the organization. They increase the drama, and decrease overall morale... which makes the place less enjoyable to work at, and makes other places look more attractive.
At a previous job, we had a ticketing system, it was terrible.
It could email, out only, not capturing email threads like RT. Its emails were useless.... with a page or so of useless data, only the ticket number being relevant.
I always blamed the system, but, as it turns out, its highly configurable, it was always a matter of cost. Then to top it all off, they only bought a limited number of seats, so you would be kicked out (and your changes not saved) after just a couple of minutes of inactivity.
I have to imagine that the productivity lost due to the peculiarities of how they chose to save money on the product more than sucked away whatever cost would have been paid up front to do it right.
When they switched to this system.... the managers who decided on it had nice new fast machines... while the help desk (who had to use it all day) were on scavanged P90s. The company tried to institute a 4 minute average turnaround time for calls... except...it easily took longer than that just to log a call in the ticketing system, I used to hang out with the helpdesk guys and they spent half the time applologizing for how slow the system was!
At least that was just a matter of the helpdesk head blowing a gasket at upper managers and telling them that they should come down and try to log a ticket in 4 minutes on a helpdesk machine to get them new dekstops.... but the rest of the problems were still there a decade later.
I never played with it.... but I shared an office with a guy who did. He was the new guy, brought in to build a big cluster for high performance computing, his specialty....and he insisted on gentoo.
He came in, and I watched him build his system...and build his system, I swear it was 3 days before he had X running! and...not due to problems or incompetence, or anything, he was a strong unix admin, it just....took that fucking long to compile everything...... of course... all the while I was poking jabs at his need to turn on all the optomistation flags and compile everything to eek out that last bit of performance from ls:)
Personal Systems: Redhat (4.1) -> Debian (bo) -> Ubuntu (5-6ish?) -> Recent Ubuntu with future plans to switch back to Debian.
Desktop and server split at Debian/Ubuntu... keeping Debian on server systems, and ubuntu on
Professionally my choices have been more dictated by job, usually being some RHEL flavor, most recently OEL. Generally this only applied to servers, but, my most recent employer has an approved desktop linux build so, rather than continue to go off the reservation, I broke down and just installed it.
Exactly.... so its up to you whether you decide to protect yourself in that way or not.
> Let the diplomats and politicians work out it. As a civilian, it's not your job so please don't make it so
I don't care for such distinctions. You may consider me a civilian, I consider myself a soldier in the global war for human rights, both here and abroad. Those diplomats are as much the enemy as anyone else, and they do not, in any way, represent my feelings on just about any issues.... fuck them too.
> Now if we as a nation were in engaged in war.
We? I would appreciate if you leave me out of your nationalist wars. I don't believe in their righteousnous and would prefer that I didn't even have to support them financially... alas I do, but I would prefer not to use the term we. You may consider it your nations war, I consider it only my nations disgrace.
The only war I recognize the legitimacy of is one against abusive powers, not by them
Irrelevant to the discussion. He wasn't asking if he should do it, or why it would or woul dnot be disrespectful.
Frankly, I am in the camp who says... if a country doesn't respect free speech, then why respect them at all? Good for him disrespecting them, they don't even respect the free speech rights of their own people...fuck their government.
> A virus (usually) can't damage the PC, it might destroy the data on it, but you can just reinstall in > a worst case scenario.
In the very narrow realm of "Physical Damage to your PC", you are absolutely correct. There are some, at least theoretical, exceptions.... CRT monitors that could be put into damaging modes... excessive constant drive access could decrease its lifetime.... some flash technologies have limite dwrites.... meh.... no big deal.
That said, damage to my pc doesn't even enter into my "worst case scenario" when it comes to this sort of compromise.
My worst case involves things like, I connect to work from home and they steal my credentials (of course 2 factor auth helps but, even without my token they can still get in when I connect). Install a keylogger on the box and get my banking passwords and clean out my accounts.
who knows what else will happen from making this cheap and portable?
Sadly because it will be called a "medical device" real innovation with them will be limited since they will be hard to get ahold of cheaply to play with (its a medical device afterall)
However.... I have to wonder how many random uses an ultrasound imaging device would have, if you took off the "medical device" label and let people have at it.
Even in medical fields, I have had an ultrasound, turns out you can use one to look through the liver at the heart. There is no reason to expect these will only help pregnant women, or be limited to old uses that had cost and availability of equipment factored into justification as to whether to use them.
What I mind is the last part. I am on with the machine, it collects all the info that a human operator would need, makes sense....helps speed things along, route calls, and keep the actual time of the operator useful, rather than monotonously getting account details....cool.
In reality though, its exactly as you say.... I spend all that time on with the computer, give it all my info, verify my account...and then... the operator gets on and asks for all that info again....
So it didn't save him from monotony, it didn't keep his time useful.... all it did was waste my time.... yay.
Or at the elementary school which looks like a much softer target all of a sudden. Or the mall... or a big rally...
Thats really the problem with it... best case scenario, if everything the TSA does works flawlessly with no way to be exploited.... even if I could put my head into such a pure fantasyland
Then their best case "win" scenario is exactly that, terrorist planners scratch airports off their target list, and move on to a different target, leaving the TSA to implement their perfect security for no reason, while they they go and blow up a school full of kids.
Slashdot Mirror
I would be absolutely shocked if any water treatment facility was actually testing the isotope composition of their water on a regular basis.
In fact, the only way I wouldn't be shocked, would be if the governor or someone else high in state politics or the water resource authority owned the testing company. In which case, all bets are off.
Ahahahahahahah I totally understand why you would think these things, but, you need a little history.
I worked in Healthcare IT for about 6 years, until a few short months ago. Before that, I actually started my career as a service tech. The thing to realise is...the group I worked in moved out of the office they were in while I was there.... the original office had a room full of chest high benches, with a built in shelf above, and lots of plugs. If this sounds like the kind of setup that would have soldering stations, then you are getting very warm...because that what they used to do!
In fact, some of the same guys I worked with...had been there since core memory that was tacked to the wall was decommed.
That sort of attitude makes perfect sense if you are building a new network, in the total absence of road blocks. A hospital environment however... well.... we are talking about an environment thats been in CONTINUOUS operation since the early 1800s. (not all hospitals are that old, of course) all new equipment, all upgrades, all troubleshooting, all goes on, while operations continue. There is no weekend downtime. There is no middle of the night downtime.... thats just to START.
Add to that the federated 'academic' model that most hospitals use for their budgeting (ask your professors to explain how departments are budgeted and why money gets suddenly spent before the end of the fiscal year, and thats very much like how hospitals work). They started bringing in all this equipment before they even had central IT. They have their own budgets and egos, sometimes bigger departments will have their own mini-IT staff even! It is utter chaos.
Now the departments decide what they want, get most of the way down the path of purchasing it, then bring in IT late in the game. IT fights with them and the vendor about their standards, but can't fight too hard or else they will tell IT to go fuck themselves and just go do it with their own money, since IT can't actually say no. (or they make a stink up to a level where IT gets the smack down)
Then patching and OS upgrades.... often you can't patch or upgrade because the vendor claims they wont support it. Occasionally they blame the FDA saying they certified it on the OS version its on (we often questioned whether that held water).
In short, the vendor and department often act like they are on the same team and IT is the roadblock, rather than the department and IT working as a team. The department, especially if they are clinical, but sometimes research too, has more clout than IT, because the trustees are from the medical professions and they are the final say.
Very early on in my career I got a stack of work orders. First I was told "they can't have windows 95 because their department hasn't been upgraded yet" (and there were internal reasons involving training and federation that meant each dept needed one or two people trained before it could be upgraded).
A week later the hardware arrived and I was told "they are getting Windows 95, OEM build, not ours" (which was a HUGE exception for them)....from that point on, every day I showed up to do something for them based on what we were doing yesterday, and every day they had already had a meeting that I wasn't privy too, and my department had made new concessions to them, totally changing what I was supposed to do ..... the ego maniac who was making them do all this, of course, just got mad at me for constantly doing the wrong thing, even though, nobody had told me the plans changed.
Eventually I heard, through more connected people than me, that he had a huge and prestegious grant and was threatening to take his grant and go to another institutiuon if they didn't give him everything he wanted....and he got it.
Now.... tell me how you control what you are using when the final say on policy comes from people who don't understand IT, and are willing to see it as a roadblock rather than part of their team? Believe me when I say there are a lot of people (not everyone of course) who know what they should be doing, and want to do things right, but, they lose a lot of battles.
Yes but, there are consequences. When someone gets shot, investigations happen, people with motive are questioned. Mode of death and circumstances affect alot.
As an example, I have some friends with a farm and a good amount of land behind it. They have a camping ground for events and a number of structures etc in the woods from the many many years of farm and other uses.
They allowed someone that was going through hard times to stay in their woods, living in one of the primitive stuctures. He helped out at the farm, feeding the animals. One day, they noticed the animals hadn't been fed, later on, they went out to check on him.... he had attempted to kill himself, but was still barely alive.
The parametics and police were decidedly unhappy about having to head out into the woods....but did tell my friends that its a really good thing that they found him when they did, because if he had died, and they came to find the dead body, the investigation would have been a very different matter, whereas, since he was (even if just barely) alive when the police arrived, they could just call it an accidental OD or possible suicide and not have to investigate.
Now, if it were a gunshot?... you know they would investigate. However.... guy with a pacemaker has a heart attack? Thats natural causes man.
This could have happened already, many times over, and nobody would be any wiser.... no need to investigate such an "obvious" death.
The chemistry that I learned in high school was pretty damned far from alchemy. However, figuring out lewis diagrams and all that talk about electron orbitals, and the history of the model of the atom definitely made it feel like a lot of applied physics.
A fact which I point out as often as I can to show people that none of those countries deserve to be treated any differently from any other tyranical regiemes, and certainly should, under no circumstances be considered our allies.
Several people have asked my why I "like" obama's facebook page even though I consider him a mass murder (for drone attacks), and have a litany of other issues with him (most of which apply just as well to Mitt, and I have no intention of voting for him either, I consider them equivalent candidates)
The answer was always that....tthere is no dislike button and I can't troll the page without hitting like. That is also why I like a page on the assault weapons ban, not because I favor gun control, but because I want to argue with the people who do.
Meh, and your government probably paid people in other countries to do the same. Not a big deal really....everybody is doing it, then pretending to be surprized when it happens to them. Piece of shit? Only if people within the government work with equivalent shitbags elsewhere.
Frankly, I don't care too much when people do the same to "my country". Damned government doesn't have our interests at heart anyway, why should I care what happens to them and their secrets? Not my problem.
Not so fast.
Any sample that is identifiable without using DNA testing is going to have many many cells, or many original copies of the DNA, and there is no reason to assume that they all broke in the same places.
Any one copy of the chromosomes probably no longer contains enough information to uniquely reconstruct the original, but some subset of them may... and since we are potentially talking about many thousands or even millions of original copies (one per cell), I suspect that their DNA can be reconstructed with far more degradation than that.
Jury? as if. Nobody goes in front of a jury anymore.
More likely the prosecutor will sit there, pile on 10 different charges, each of which could land him in jail, then will offer him a much lighter sentance (either jail or parole) if he just confesses.
Most people, even innocent ones, will take that deal. In fact, its been shown that the standard techniques used by police and prosecutors can get confessions up to 90% of the time, regardless of real innocense or guilt.
wow jail for blink tags? Talk about soft! I was thinking more along the lines of "rendition"
I am a rider, and I have been through the MSF course, I recommend it.
No he is right, loud pipes most certainly do NOT save lives. Read some of the other comments, they are spot on. The majority of sound is heard right next to or behind the bike, not in front. Also, insulated cars and loud stereos, as you point out, can mostly cancel out bike noise.
Also... the noise is easily loud enough to damage hearing. In fact, motorcycle riders on the highway are advised to wear ear plugs, because even the sound of the wind will damage your ears over time in a full face helmet above 40-50 mph or so (never mind 80 mph :) ... thats loud)
What a motorcyclist has however is vision. A riders head rides almost as high as an SUV. He is also small. He has a lot of ability to avoid accidents, using his vision, size, and ability to accelerate.
I mean yes, there is a blind spot.... a good rider stays the fuck out of them and is very mindful of them when it can't be avoided. A good portion of being a good rider in traffic is assuming cars might not see you and riding specifically to increase visibility.
Good riders learn to use lane position to make sure they are seen and keep cars in their space, and make space for escapes. (sometimes you want to practically hug the lines)
Then... they practice evasive moves. A bike is a very agile device, but, if you don't intuitively know what to do, you will do the wrong thing. A lot of riders (a stunning number) don't even know that the bike counter-steers.
The vast majority of motorcycle accidents can be avoided by smart riding and avoiding the situations where a driver not seeing them means they die. That's never a smart bet. Assume they can't see you, make them see you.
> Nolan called his site's decision to post the video 'ethical,'
> because 'it is news' but research suggests that graphic
> depictions of suicide in the media can spur copycat
> suicides, especially among young people, and the World
> Health Organization's guidelines warn against
> sensationalizing it.
But nothing.... there is no contradiction between those statements. There is nothing unethical about showing people an incident that happened in public, particularly when its news.
Nothing about WHO guidelines or what other people choose to do has any ethical bearing, no matter how much emotional reaction it makes you have. A copycat suicide is 100% on the shoulders of the person who does it, not the person who showed them what they are copying.
Nobody else bears a shred of responsibility.
Well multiple incidents yes, but theres multiple incidents of everything in a large enough area. Don't get me wrong, gays have had it bad in many ways, but actual murder has been rare.
My assessment is this... most people don't care and never did. In fact, if you look at the few studies on the subject, have found that non-gay males (specifically) fall into two groups. The largest group indicates that other people's gayness is not a big deal to them, whether they approve of it or not. The smaller group has strong negative feelings about gay people, hates them, blames social problems on them etc.
When shown explicit images of gay sexual activity, the first group showed no serious reaction, and did no erection was measured. The second group, the people who really have a problem with homosexuals. Not only did most of them get erections, but in post session interviews, denied it.
One thing I have noticed is that these, violent closed gay homophobes (which I think turns out to be an appropriate term), definitely did seem to teach most people, early on, to at least pretend to dislike homosexuals and reflexively deny being one.
I have met a few people who made comments about how the thought of men having sex disgusted them. As a teenager, I always thought that odd because, being straight myself, the thought of men having sex never crossed my mind at all until someone like him brought it up... even so it was never hard to conjure up the images.... it never really made sense why it bothered them so much. Now, well, it makes a lot more sense.
Anyway, In another post it was said lynching is communication, but its not just to the lynched person, its to anyone who speaks out for them. That goes for many forms of violence, whether the communication is 100% intended or not, that is the message sent, and most people learn fast.
True but, I don't think this applies here. They were not holding violations in reserve, they simply did not know he was violating them. It wasn't until journalists investigated the source of the film, and made the trail back to him and a few accounts that it was known.
Now I don't tend to like the form of these restrictions in general, and don't think this is the sort of thing that should land him in jail....except.... there are other violations.
Its pretty clear that any agreement he had with the actors in the film, each and every one of them, was negotiated in bad faith. He lied to them about the nature of the film being released, at the very least they should have known this and been able to either refuse to have themselves associated with it, or demanded more money due to the risk involved. Smells like fraud to me.
Not just that....
I have a friend who was telling me about an issue at his workplace. They brought in a jerk... possibly not a "brilliant one" but...it hardly matters....
Because his being a jerk actually prompted the two really brilliant researchers who did the core development of their product line leave....
I don't care how brilliant this guy is.... I have a hard time swallowing that he could be so brilliant as to be worth the damage caused by pushing key people out the door.... unless pushing them out the door was the plan... which... while I wont rule out ever being the right move, but, seems unlikely to be.
As a strong tech geek, I tend to get along with the jerks (as long as I don't report to them), but.... that doesn't mean I think they are healthy for the organization. They increase the drama, and decrease overall morale... which makes the place less enjoyable to work at, and makes other places look more attractive.
At a previous job, we had a ticketing system, it was terrible.
It could email, out only, not capturing email threads like RT. Its emails were useless.... with a page or so of useless data, only the ticket number being relevant.
I always blamed the system, but, as it turns out, its highly configurable, it was always a matter of cost. Then to top it all off, they only bought a limited number of seats, so you would be kicked out (and your changes not saved) after just a couple of minutes of inactivity.
I have to imagine that the productivity lost due to the peculiarities of how they chose to save money on the product more than sucked away whatever cost would have been paid up front to do it right.
When they switched to this system.... the managers who decided on it had nice new fast machines... while the help desk (who had to use it all day) were on scavanged P90s. The company tried to institute a 4 minute average turnaround time for calls... except...it easily took longer than that just to log a call in the ticketing system, I used to hang out with the helpdesk guys and they spent half the time applologizing for how slow the system was!
At least that was just a matter of the helpdesk head blowing a gasket at upper managers and telling them that they should come down and try to log a ticket in 4 minutes on a helpdesk machine to get them new dekstops.... but the rest of the problems were still there a decade later.
I never played with it.... but I shared an office with a guy who did. He was the new guy, brought in to build a big cluster for high performance computing, his specialty....and he insisted on gentoo.
He came in, and I watched him build his system...and build his system, I swear it was 3 days before he had X running! and...not due to problems or incompetence, or anything, he was a strong unix admin, it just....took that fucking long to compile everything... ... of course... all the while I was poking jabs at his need to turn on all the optomistation flags and compile everything to eek out that last bit of performance from ls :)
Personal Systems:
Redhat (4.1) -> Debian (bo) -> Ubuntu (5-6ish?) -> Recent Ubuntu with future plans to switch back to Debian.
Desktop and server split at Debian/Ubuntu... keeping Debian on server systems, and ubuntu on
Professionally my choices have been more dictated by job, usually being some RHEL flavor, most recently OEL. Generally this only applied to servers, but, my most recent employer has an approved desktop linux build so, rather than continue to go off the reservation, I broke down and just installed it.
> rather for your own protection.
Exactly.... so its up to you whether you decide to protect yourself in that way or not.
> Let the diplomats and politicians work out it. As a civilian, it's not your job so please don't make it so
I don't care for such distinctions. You may consider me a civilian, I consider myself a soldier in the global war for human rights, both here and abroad. Those diplomats are as much the enemy as anyone else, and they do not, in any way, represent my feelings on just about any issues.... fuck them too.
> Now if we as a nation were in engaged in war.
We? I would appreciate if you leave me out of your nationalist wars. I don't believe in their righteousnous and would prefer that I didn't even have to support them financially... alas I do, but I would prefer not to use the term we. You may consider it your nations war, I consider it only my nations disgrace.
The only war I recognize the legitimacy of is one against abusive powers, not by them
We're doomed as a republic.
Irrelevant to the discussion. He wasn't asking if he should do it, or why it would or woul dnot be disrespectful.
Frankly, I am in the camp who says... if a country doesn't respect free speech, then why respect them at all? Good for him disrespecting them, they don't even respect the free speech rights of their own people...fuck their government.
> A virus (usually) can't damage the PC, it might destroy the data on it, but you can just reinstall in
> a worst case scenario.
In the very narrow realm of "Physical Damage to your PC", you are absolutely correct. There are some, at least theoretical, exceptions.... CRT monitors that could be put into damaging modes... excessive constant drive access could decrease its lifetime.... some flash technologies have limite dwrites.... meh.... no big deal.
That said, damage to my pc doesn't even enter into my "worst case scenario" when it comes to this sort of compromise.
My worst case involves things like, I connect to work from home and they steal my credentials (of course 2 factor auth helps but, even without my token they can still get in when I connect). Install a keylogger on the box and get my banking passwords and clean out my accounts.
but hey, having to fix my pc...that would suck
who knows what else will happen from making this cheap and portable?
Sadly because it will be called a "medical device" real innovation with them will be limited since they will be hard to get ahold of cheaply to play with (its a medical device afterall)
However.... I have to wonder how many random uses an ultrasound imaging device would have, if you took off the "medical device" label and let people have at it.
Even in medical fields, I have had an ultrasound, turns out you can use one to look through the liver at the heart. There is no reason to expect these will only help pregnant women, or be limited to old uses that had cost and availability of equipment factored into justification as to whether to use them.
I don't even mind the hybrid systems, in theory.
What I mind is the last part. I am on with the machine, it collects all the info that a human operator would need, makes sense....helps speed things along, route calls, and keep the actual time of the operator useful, rather than monotonously getting account details....cool.
In reality though, its exactly as you say.... I spend all that time on with the computer, give it all my info, verify my account...and then... the operator gets on and asks for all that info again....
So it didn't save him from monotony, it didn't keep his time useful.... all it did was waste my time.... yay.
Or at the elementary school which looks like a much softer target all of a sudden. Or the mall... or a big rally...
Thats really the problem with it... best case scenario, if everything the TSA does works flawlessly with no way to be exploited.... even if I could put my head into such a pure fantasyland
Then their best case "win" scenario is exactly that, terrorist planners scratch airports off their target list, and move on to a different target, leaving the TSA to implement their perfect security for no reason, while they they go and blow up a school full of kids.