Will have to look into this more. I agree completely, as long as it is "With a court order", that means there is oversight. It also means they can't do it "Willy nilly" or wholesale. It also usually (and this is why I want to read a bit more) means that they eventually have to tell you that they did it (even if the case never goes to prosecution). It also means, that any evidence obtained could end up the root of a very big poisoned tree if the original order is invalidated. (it happens)
Though, I do wonder how that works. I mean, if GPS data is what puts them in the right place at the right time to catch you breaking the law, and the original order to GPS your car is later found to have been improper, does that impropriety extend to otherwise plain sight evidence that happened to be observed because they were checking a place out?
For example, they know Alice parks her car around the corner from the park every day for 2 hours. So they send an undercover to the park to watch her, and he observes her commit a crime. Is that fruit of the original tree?
It may be a moot point since the police could almost certainly arrest her on the spot, and never inform her that they were there watching her originally.
But overall, no. No real issue here. I always assumed they could.
> Now, think about all the programs that were written with the knowledge that renames are fast. Go no further: the standard > toolchain is more than enough to demonstrate this. Is it absolutely necessary that temporary files, however big, are > contiguous?
We are talking Linux here. So um... I don't really follow. Of course renames are fast, its just a directory file update. Inode doesn't change, nor do data blocks. The only time where a rename isn't fast is when the rename crosses a mount point and really becomes a copy/delete operation.
If you write a/tmp file and then rename it to make the final file, unless you write into a different filesystem, then no data blocks change... so what does this have to do with contiguous blocks? If you care at all, then writting a/tmp file and renaming it is no different from writing in place (except for safety issues wrt an early exit and the like)
A good point but... also... dipping in bleach is not quite the same as letting the chlorine in the municipal water take care of it. The chlorine in the water supply isn't going to turn your clothing white, and it wont burn your eyes either. Yet, a drop of household bleach in your eye, and you are going to be in a world of hurt.
So while it looks like this bacteria is chlorine resistant, that doesn't mean its going to survive a good bleaching. Could use alcohol too, but remember... alcohol requires around 10 minutes of contact to kill most things (I was just reading a lysol can for other reasons... apparently alcohol is its major "active ingredient"... and gives appropriate time of contact to kill various germs)
Actually science has been many religions unto itself for a long time:
Translation: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." -- Max Planck (translated) from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Max_Planck
Seems like you might do better looking for electrical activity patterns in the amygdala.
I find this interesting as it touches my life... my wife has always been afraid of spiders, but recently her fear of them has gone into the realm of extreme phobia. Panic attacks, avoiding places where a spider might be etc. She can't even watch a scene in a movie that has a spider-like creature in it without having an attack.
Of course, she has panic attack issues anyway, it makes me wonder if some peoples amygdalas are just built with a hair trigger.
Actually, I doubt that it is. Generally the number of good people doing nothing wrong is soo much greater than the number of "bad guys" that really, I doubt the police can be said to make a real difference in many ways except symbolically.
Beyond that, even allowing wiretapping is a problem. You see, a backdoor that lets one guy in, can let someone else in. Just putting the ability to wiretap in the phone system, and not putting in technology (like end to end handset encryption, which is more than feasible) puts us all at risk.
This is not a theoretical risk. In Athens recently a number of charitable organizations, businessmen, and government offices were all illegally wiretapped... by someone who hacked the phone system! Not even a rogue cop, just some as of yet unknown person who exploited vulnerabilities and installed his own backdoor that used the built in "legal intercept" system to wiretap people.
Ok they are liars. Cops lie all the time. In fact, they will even tell you (if they aren't trying to pressure you at the time that is) "we are allowed to lie" (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6014022229458915912) and they have all manner of sneaky little tricks. Of course, they are supposedly not allowed to lie once up on the stand, but, thats been known to happen too.
And... man you guys need to fix your laws. The rule about all parties knowing that a conversation is being taped is one of the few reasons I really am proud to live in MA. I mean seriously, isn't telling someone they are being taped at least well, good manners? I, personally, think its a nasty thing to do, and its right that we have laws against it here. You should ask your state legislature for the same.
I agree with the concept, but I don't know if I am ready to toss recriminations. Yes, it is indeed the job of a scientist to both publish his work, and to try and shoot holes in it and show how he might be wrong. He should be honest as to what it really means (if cosmologists are bad on this front, look at a science where money is more heavily mixed in like pharmacology or other medical sciences and you can see this problem is rampant to the point that you wonder how they have any credibility left).
However, you can't always be sure that your meaning is understood by everyone. Have you never had someone do something other than what you wanted and claim that its what you asked of them? I just had an issue this past day where I told someone I had to check on something to see if I could help him, and he only heard "yea I want to help". Is that my fault that he ran off and made commitments himself based on me helping him? I told him 3 times I wasn't sure if I even could.
Sometimes, despite best efforts to prevent them, misunderstandings happen.
White? Please... before long your gonna have real options. White? I mean...why be white when you can be blue? or green? or red? Or.... you could have mood skin! Maybe a little glow in the dark anyone? Sure there may be a few side effects, maybe it wil destroy your liver in 3 years and make your thyroid go hypractive if you survive beyond that but.... the possibilities for matching with your ipod will never be greater.
Well I wouldn't say it took years, but, years of doing it is why I am as good at is as I am... but it took a while before I could really say I became really fast at it. Of course, the same is true of many things. I thought I was a great driver shortly after I started too... and much of my technical skill was gained quickly. However, it took years of doing it to put on those bits of polish that I see now really make all the difference.
Someone I know was in a class that was going over drunk driving statistics and noted where the demographics fell for accidents and drinking. He said the person running the class asked "What does this data tell us?". He quickly raised his hand and pointed to the data and said "It says that it takes about 10 years to learn how to drive well".
There is always the matter of what you can do vs what you care to do.
I make mistakes typing, then fix them. If I don't care so much, or am in a hurry, they don't get fixed. Actually, I think I make more editing mistakes than actual typing. Cut here, paste there, forget to proofread one last time.... some of my worst mistakes are half of one thought mashed with half of another.
Overall, I see little need for explicitly learning touch typing. I learned to type exclusively by use, and its a fine way to learn. I do a very fast "hunt and peck" that evolved past the "hunt" I spend nearly all my time looking at the screen (since I am seldom doing data entry) but can type accurately while looking off screen at a paper or another screen.
If you want people to learn to use a keyboard better, get them on IRC for a few years. It will learn them real good. Can't say it will help grammar any.
I am not sure that is actually even clear. I mean, we are really talking copyright which makes all this "stealing" and "property" analogy fall though, but, there have been cases where someone forcibly took back his property and the court sided with him. In fact, there was Laidlaw v Organ where Laidlaw sold tobacco to Organ. At the time of the deal, he asked Organ if he knew any reason the price should be higher. He said he did not. In fact, he knew that the war had ended, which was depressing prices.
Two days later Laidlaw forcibly took back his tobacco. (111,000 lbs of it). The court sided with him. Since Organ had been asked and withheld information that would have been vital to the sale (which he did know at the time) and thus took advantage of Laidlaw. Caveat Emptor!
>>You know, observational studies are still scientific. There are plenty of hypotheses that can be >>tested without randomized controlled trials. > > Not really. Observational studies are generally shodily researched, poorly implemented, have less > than 50 data points and no controls, and are sloshed around in a statistical package until the > numbers come out. They're generally done by people who have come to a conclusion and now need to > dress it up with a "scientific study".
I ahve to agree, though, at the same time, you can't just say "Because its observational, its badly done". A poorly done study is a poorly done study.
One of the more enlightening things I read on the subject was the comments on a UK study on the effects of cannabis on driving. They went over previous studies, and it was something of a look into "How not to study this".
Previous studies did such things as: - Look at crash statistics that don't differenciate THC ingestion from THC + other drugs (including alcohol). This mistake was made to such an extent that the majority of data that was being used was data from drivers who had BOTH drugs in their system.
and
- Give cannabis to people who were not users and had no history of use, and study their driving.
Their study was better, in that it attempted to correct these by using test subjects who were current users. Lo and Behold, it came to wildly different conclusions than all the previous studies. (found little impairment and that experienced users tended to overcompensate for their impairment to the point that they found no increased risk)
The thing is... with so many bad studies out there... how do we know whats real? I have seen major headlines declaring a medical links being found between behaviour and disease that turned out to be based on an insignificant sample of people from a study that was looking at something else entirely.
Shit, I might vote for some of these people if I thought any of them were liberals.
Frankly, both parties disgust the hell out of me, and I can't believe the absurd labels they put on themselves. They are really more like a bunch of moderate reactionary populists than anything else, on both sides of the isle.
Its all more about not offending too many people too much than about doing something right or good. We have the bud light of government. Goes down smooth and flavorless with balls to speak of.
Well, there are several reasons for it. Mostly its what we both said we wanted from the start and it started with no commitment. So... why fix what isn't broken?
Look at the rates of infidelity in our society and I wonder why more people don't just admit that monogamy is a much higher standard than many people live up to. And for what, so you have to turn down something that could be rewarding for you?... or for her. (sometimes its just nice getting the house to myself)
To each their own of course. Though I have had a person who cheated on every guy she ever dated tell me she was jealous of our relationship and wished she could do the same but said she gets "too jealous". I mean... really.
Put in your malbug, send the laptops out in a high profile way... see what happens. Do they investigate? Do they even find what you did? That, in and of itself, could be valuable information, and possibly worth 5 laptops.
Though I do enjoy the double standard. Someone breaks into your systems, with evidence. Think the FBI is going to care unless they can be shown to have done massive damage or stolen real money?
Here someone does something that is, on its face, perfectly legal and straight up, but the suspicion of potential wrongdoing and the FBI are all over it. I am pretty sure that if someone sent me a free laptop and I called the FBI, they would just laugh at me.
> In other words: it's focus. The equivalent of a retreat - buggering off to some cave to contemplate the mysteries of > life - why it's so unpleasant, etc. because you NEED to come to some sort of understanding of whatever it is that's > going on with your life in order to move on.
That jives with my experiences.
I remember being depressed and finding someone to talk to about my thoughts. What I found was, it didn't really help except to slow me down. Nothing she said really helped, it was just me working it out. I was several steps ahead of her at any given time...afterall...they were my worries, I had lots of time to analyze them.
Even at the time I could see that there was a feedback loop going on. The problem was, I wasn't seeing how to break that feedback loop, since it became so important to do so that every setback was huge.
I crave companionship and sex. Why can't I get them? I am single and a little socially inept with women. Why am I socially inept with women? I went to a,....oops bad branch pop back. How can I be les inept? Try to meet women. How do I do that....
Next thing you know I am posting on craigslist and watching pickup artist videos (which all boil down to "try not to come off as the lonely sex-starved loser that you think you are")... why aren't they responding? Why do the ones who do not want to date? Why am I always the friend? I crave companionship and sex....
Eventually events transpired that the cycle was broken, I grew, learned a lot about myself and about people. Took a couple of years in various paths of that. Feeling better about myself helped... but what was cause and what was effect? Do I feel better because I am in a stable relationship? What came first the fuckbuddy or the self-esteem? By the time I met her, I was mostly out of the rabbit hole. It was a good 6 months before I wouldn't now and again slip back in for a moment before I realized I didn't need to be in there anymore.
But thats how I approach all things that I succeed at. Just get in there and pound on the problem until I find out what needs to change. When your pounding on your self, it can hurt.
> People in a so-called "open relationship" generally are. Sounds more like "fuck buddies" to me.
I actually find that pretty insulting.
Fuck buddies, who live together, cook for each other, go to each others family events, stand by eachother in the hospital (my pneumonia, her mother's cancer)?
Doesn't really look like fuck buddies from where I am sitting.
Same here. Mine even has it. Though, its a newer line thats jacketed by a plastic line. Apparently this is a very good thing, since otherwise a broken oil line in the foundation can end up being quite costly to clean up. Of course, as it stands now it will just fill the jacket and spill all over the floor anyway, so I am not exactly sure whats so much better about the jacket.
before I saw your post, I started digging around in synaptic.... er I mean I did an apt-cache search since I am a command line warrior who never uses WIMPy tools! (heh like firefox)
Anyway, joking aside, I found the -generic kernels and installed the latest. My machine promptly paniced on reboot.
I brought it back up on the old kernel and removed the offending kernel. I am sure its something stupid, will have to track it down. In the past its been changes in the drivers that caused my ide hard drive to show up as hda or sda in different releases...which makes it hard for the cryptoroot stuff to find its drive.
In this case, it found the drive and decrypted it fine... then paniced.
Slashdot Mirror
Will have to look into this more. I agree completely, as long as it is "With a court order", that means there is oversight. It also means they can't do it "Willy nilly" or wholesale. It also usually (and this is why I want to read a bit more) means that they eventually have to tell you that they did it (even if the case never goes to prosecution). It also means, that any evidence obtained could end up the root of a very big poisoned tree if the original order is invalidated. (it happens)
Though, I do wonder how that works. I mean, if GPS data is what puts them in the right place at the right time to catch you breaking the law, and the original order to GPS your car is later found to have been improper, does that impropriety extend to otherwise plain sight evidence that happened to be observed because they were checking a place out?
For example, they know Alice parks her car around the corner from the park every day for 2 hours. So they send an undercover to the park to watch her, and he observes her commit a crime. Is that fruit of the original tree?
It may be a moot point since the police could almost certainly arrest her on the spot, and never inform her that they were there watching her originally.
But overall, no. No real issue here. I always assumed they could.
-Steve
If you thought it ran poorly on a 486, I actually installed it on a 386 once. It certainly installed and ran but, it was far from any fun to use :)
-Steve
> Now, think about all the programs that were written with the knowledge that renames are fast. Go no further: the standard
> toolchain is more than enough to demonstrate this. Is it absolutely necessary that temporary files, however big, are
> contiguous?
We are talking Linux here. So um... I don't really follow. Of course renames are fast, its just a directory file update. Inode doesn't change, nor do data blocks. The only time where a rename isn't fast is when the rename crosses a mount point and really becomes a copy/delete operation.
If you write a /tmp file and then rename it to make the final file, unless you write into a different filesystem, then no data blocks change... so what does this have to do with contiguous blocks? If you care at all, then writting a /tmp file and renaming it is no different from writing in place (except for safety issues wrt an early exit and the like)
-Steve
A good point but... also... dipping in bleach is not quite the same as letting the chlorine in the municipal water take care of it. The chlorine in the water supply isn't going to turn your clothing white, and it wont burn your eyes either. Yet, a drop of household bleach in your eye, and you are going to be in a world of hurt.
So while it looks like this bacteria is chlorine resistant, that doesn't mean its going to survive a good bleaching. Could use alcohol too, but remember... alcohol requires around 10 minutes of contact to kill most things (I was just reading a lysol can for other reasons... apparently alcohol is its major "active ingredient"... and gives appropriate time of contact to kill various germs)
-Steve
Actually science has been many religions unto itself for a long time:
Translation: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." -- Max Planck (translated)
from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Max_Planck
-Steve
Seems like you might do better looking for electrical activity patterns in the amygdala.
I find this interesting as it touches my life... my wife has always been afraid of spiders, but recently her fear of them has gone into the realm of extreme phobia. Panic attacks, avoiding places where a spider might be etc. She can't even watch a scene in a movie that has a spider-like creature in it without having an attack.
Of course, she has panic attack issues anyway, it makes me wonder if some peoples amygdalas are just built with a hair trigger.
-Steve
Actually, I doubt that it is. Generally the number of good people doing nothing wrong is soo much greater than the number of "bad guys" that really, I doubt the police can be said to make a real difference in many ways except symbolically.
Beyond that, even allowing wiretapping is a problem. You see, a backdoor that lets one guy in, can let someone else in. Just putting the ability to wiretap in the phone system, and not putting in technology (like end to end handset encryption, which is more than feasible) puts us all at risk.
This is not a theoretical risk. In Athens recently a number of charitable organizations, businessmen, and government offices were all illegally wiretapped... by someone who hacked the phone system! Not even a rogue cop, just some as of yet unknown person who exploited vulnerabilities and installed his own backdoor that used the built in "legal intercept" system to wiretap people.
-Steve
Ok they are liars. Cops lie all the time. In fact, they will even tell you (if they aren't trying to pressure you at the time that is) "we are allowed to lie" (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6014022229458915912) and they have all manner of sneaky little tricks. Of course, they are supposedly not allowed to lie once up on the stand, but, thats been known to happen too.
And... man you guys need to fix your laws. The rule about all parties knowing that a conversation is being taped is one of the few reasons I really am proud to live in MA. I mean seriously, isn't telling someone they are being taped at least well, good manners? I, personally, think its a nasty thing to do, and its right that we have laws against it here. You should ask your state legislature for the same.
-Steve
Well brown is easy we already have several ways to reach a nice brown tone.
I agree with the concept, but I don't know if I am ready to toss recriminations. Yes, it is indeed the job of a scientist to both publish his work, and to try and shoot holes in it and show how he might be wrong. He should be honest as to what it really means (if cosmologists are bad on this front, look at a science where money is more heavily mixed in like pharmacology or other medical sciences and you can see this problem is rampant to the point that you wonder how they have any credibility left).
However, you can't always be sure that your meaning is understood by everyone. Have you never had someone do something other than what you wanted and claim that its what you asked of them? I just had an issue this past day where I told someone I had to check on something to see if I could help him, and he only heard "yea I want to help". Is that my fault that he ran off and made commitments himself based on me helping him? I told him 3 times I wasn't sure if I even could.
Sometimes, despite best efforts to prevent them, misunderstandings happen.
-Steve
White? Please... before long your gonna have real options. White? I mean...why be white when you can be blue? or green? or red? Or.... you could have mood skin! Maybe a little glow in the dark anyone? Sure there may be a few side effects, maybe it wil destroy your liver in 3 years and make your thyroid go hypractive if you survive beyond that but.... the possibilities for matching with your ipod will never be greater.
-Steve
As a very geek friendly woman that I knew in the past said "I am easy, but I am really picky"
-Steve
I don't believe the post, or article, ever said that nice people are always wrong, right people are always jerks, or jerks are always right.
The question was... given the choice between A and B which would you prefer.
Or... another way to ask... which quality do you prefer, correctness or niceness?
I don't know if thats an accurate correction, there doesn't seem to be much of a difference between prosecutor and whore in a lot of places.
Well I wouldn't say it took years, but, years of doing it is why I am as good at is as I am... but it took a while before I could really say I became really fast at it. Of course, the same is true of many things. I thought I was a great driver shortly after I started too... and much of my technical skill was gained quickly. However, it took years of doing it to put on those bits of polish that I see now really make all the difference.
Someone I know was in a class that was going over drunk driving statistics and noted where the demographics fell for accidents and drinking. He said the person running the class asked "What does this data tell us?". He quickly raised his hand and pointed to the data and said "It says that it takes about 10 years to learn how to drive well".
-Steve
There is always the matter of what you can do vs what you care to do.
I make mistakes typing, then fix them. If I don't care so much, or am in a hurry, they don't get fixed. Actually, I think I make more editing mistakes than actual typing. Cut here, paste there, forget to proofread one last time.... some of my worst mistakes are half of one thought mashed with half of another.
Overall, I see little need for explicitly learning touch typing. I learned to type exclusively by use, and its a fine way to learn. I do a very fast "hunt and peck" that evolved past the "hunt" I spend nearly all my time looking at the screen (since I am seldom doing data entry) but can type accurately while looking off screen at a paper or another screen.
If you want people to learn to use a keyboard better, get them on IRC for a few years. It will learn them real good. Can't say it will help grammar any.
-Steve
I am not sure that is actually even clear. I mean, we are really talking copyright which makes all this "stealing" and "property" analogy fall though, but, there have been cases where someone forcibly took back his property and the court sided with him. In fact, there was Laidlaw v Organ where Laidlaw sold tobacco to Organ. At the time of the deal, he asked Organ if he knew any reason the price should be higher. He said he did not. In fact, he knew that the war had ended, which was depressing prices.
Two days later Laidlaw forcibly took back his tobacco. (111,000 lbs of it). The court sided with him. Since Organ had been asked and withheld information that would have been vital to the sale (which he did know at the time) and thus took advantage of Laidlaw. Caveat Emptor!
-Steve
>>You know, observational studies are still scientific. There are plenty of hypotheses that can be >>tested without randomized controlled trials.
>
> Not really. Observational studies are generally shodily researched, poorly implemented, have less
> than 50 data points and no controls, and are sloshed around in a statistical package until the
> numbers come out. They're generally done by people who have come to a conclusion and now need to
> dress it up with a "scientific study".
I ahve to agree, though, at the same time, you can't just say "Because its observational, its badly done". A poorly done study is a poorly done study.
One of the more enlightening things I read on the subject was the comments on a UK study on the effects of cannabis on driving. They went over previous studies, and it was something of a look into "How not to study this".
Previous studies did such things as:
- Look at crash statistics that don't differenciate THC ingestion from THC + other drugs (including alcohol). This mistake was made to such an extent that the majority of data that was being used was data from drivers who had BOTH drugs in their system.
and
- Give cannabis to people who were not users and had no history of use, and study their driving.
Their study was better, in that it attempted to correct these by using test subjects who were current users. Lo and Behold, it came to wildly different conclusions than all the previous studies. (found little impairment and that experienced users tended to overcompensate for their impairment to the point that they found no increased risk)
The thing is... with so many bad studies out there... how do we know whats real? I have seen major headlines declaring a medical links being found between behaviour and disease that turned out to be based on an insignificant sample of people from a study that was looking at something else entirely.
-Steve
Shit, I might vote for some of these people if I thought any of them were liberals.
Frankly, both parties disgust the hell out of me, and I can't believe the absurd labels they put on themselves. They are really more like a bunch of moderate reactionary populists than anything else, on both sides of the isle.
Its all more about not offending too many people too much than about doing something right or good. We have the bud light of government. Goes down smooth and flavorless with balls to speak of.
-Steve
Well, there are several reasons for it. Mostly its what we both said we wanted from the start and it started with no commitment. So... why fix what isn't broken?
Look at the rates of infidelity in our society and I wonder why more people don't just admit that monogamy is a much higher standard than many people live up to. And for what, so you have to turn down something that could be rewarding for you? ... or for her. (sometimes its just nice getting the house to myself)
To each their own of course. Though I have had a person who cheated on every guy she ever dated tell me she was jealous of our relationship and wished she could do the same but said she gets "too jealous". I mean... really.
-Steve
Then again.... maybe this is just QA.
Put in your malbug, send the laptops out in a high profile way... see what happens. Do they investigate? Do they even find what you did? That, in and of itself, could be valuable information, and possibly worth 5 laptops.
Though I do enjoy the double standard. Someone breaks into your systems, with evidence. Think the FBI is going to care unless they can be shown to have done massive damage or stolen real money?
Here someone does something that is, on its face, perfectly legal and straight up, but the suspicion of potential wrongdoing and the FBI are all over it. I am pretty sure that if someone sent me a free laptop and I called the FBI, they would just laugh at me.
-Steve
> In other words: it's focus. The equivalent of a retreat - buggering off to some cave to contemplate the mysteries of
> life - why it's so unpleasant, etc. because you NEED to come to some sort of understanding of whatever it is that's
> going on with your life in order to move on.
That jives with my experiences.
I remember being depressed and finding someone to talk to about my thoughts. What I found was, it didn't really help except to slow me down. Nothing she said really helped, it was just me working it out. I was several steps ahead of her at any given time...afterall...they were my worries, I had lots of time to analyze them.
Even at the time I could see that there was a feedback loop going on. The problem was, I wasn't seeing how to break that feedback loop, since it became so important to do so that every setback was huge.
I crave companionship and sex. Why can't I get them? I am single and a little socially inept with women. Why am I socially inept with women? I went to a,....oops bad branch pop back. How can I be les inept? Try to meet women. How do I do that....
Next thing you know I am posting on craigslist and watching pickup artist videos (which all boil down to "try not to come off as the lonely sex-starved loser that you think you are")... why aren't they responding? Why do the ones who do not want to date? Why am I always the friend? I crave companionship and sex....
Eventually events transpired that the cycle was broken, I grew, learned a lot about myself and about people. Took a couple of years in various paths of that. Feeling better about myself helped... but what was cause and what was effect? Do I feel better because I am in a stable relationship? What came first the fuckbuddy or the self-esteem? By the time I met her, I was mostly out of the rabbit hole. It was a good 6 months before I wouldn't now and again slip back in for a moment before I realized I didn't need to be in there anymore.
But thats how I approach all things that I succeed at. Just get in there and pound on the problem until I find out what needs to change. When your pounding on your self, it can hurt.
-Steve
> People in a so-called "open relationship" generally are. Sounds more like "fuck buddies" to me.
I actually find that pretty insulting.
Fuck buddies, who live together, cook for each other, go to each others family events, stand by eachother in the hospital (my pneumonia, her mother's cancer)?
Doesn't really look like fuck buddies from where I am sitting.
-Steve
Same here. Mine even has it. Though, its a newer line thats jacketed by a plastic line. Apparently this is a very good thing, since otherwise a broken oil line in the foundation can end up being quite costly to clean up. Of course, as it stands now it will just fill the jacket and spill all over the floor anyway, so I am not exactly sure whats so much better about the jacket.
before I saw your post, I started digging around in synaptic.... er I mean I did an apt-cache search since I am a command line warrior who never uses WIMPy tools! (heh like firefox)
Anyway, joking aside, I found the -generic kernels and installed the latest. My machine promptly paniced on reboot.
I brought it back up on the old kernel and removed the offending kernel. I am sure its something stupid, will have to track it down. In the past its been changes in the drivers that caused my ide hard drive to show up as hda or sda in different releases...which makes it hard for the cryptoroot stuff to find its drive.
In this case, it found the drive and decrypted it fine... then paniced.
Oh yah.... and the laptop is 3 years old.
-Steve