The hardware was on US soil. The alleged crime took place at that physical point. The crime is on US soil.
'Snot my fault but that's their reasoning. It makes sense, at least at first blush it does. People should lock their doors but it's still a crime to enter an unlocked home in my jurisdiction.
Non-sequitur. It does not follow, for those playing the home game. Hacking an account is illegal. To say that if she'd not had encrypted email on there that it is not a crime is, well... Stupid. I'm not sure who moderated you up.
Even if she had done no wrong, his actions are still illegal. They are different crimes (maybe) but they are still going to be charged with other crimes.
There's a documentary called "The Worst Town on the Internet" and it has him in there. He didn't think he did much wrong and was pissed about having gotten a long sentence in his come country. He's gotta be right pissed now that he's gotta come to the US and face more time.
I do not moderate -- ever. Even though I can, I do not. I have my reasons. Moderators can moderate however they see fit. You do not get to tell them how to spend their points. Get an account if you don't want to be rate-limited. While they both are about Apple, your comment is off-topic, at best. Trolling at worst. You were +1 at the time, that's overrated.
I do notice a trend. You seem to think others are obligated to behave in a manner that suits you - without regards for others feel on the subject. You seem to think you've got both power and insight. You seem to have an ego larger than its worth. You don't get to decide how someone moderates your post. You don't get to pick how often you're allowed to post. You don't get to change the subject to what you want to discuss as opposed to the topic.
In short, you're basically saying, "Don't tell me what to do." While, at the same time, saying, "Do what I say." Whatever makes you think you're entitled to be given consideration? I can assure you, you're not special nor are you in charge. You're a guest on someone else's hardware, act like it.
Well, act like it if you want to be heard. Just get a damned account if you want your posts seen.
You're not purchasing it. You're licensing it. Hopefully you can find someone to sell it to you (not license it to you) at a price you and they can agree on. Note the difference in verbiage. That's essential and important to understand.
When you "buy" a track at iTunes then you're not buying it, you're licensing it. Your OS is probably licensed and not purchased. Even in Linux that is somewhat true. I do not own the code on my computer. If I did own it then I could close it up.
Now, please don't hate me for bringing you this news. I am not the person in charge. I am not the boss. That's just how it works and I would like to see it done differently, at least to some extent.
You don't buy a book. Even before, you didn't buy the contents of the book. You paid for the book. You never had ownership of the content. You had a license to use the content. You were free to trade or sell the contents. I suspect that one could transfer ownership of the device the e-books are loaded onto and win that battle in court. You can, almost certainly, loan it - irrespective of the EULA terminology.
But, even with a book, you've never owned it. If you did own it (it'd be a work-for-hire) then you'd be able to make as many copies of it as you want AND sell those copies. You were, even back in the day, licensing the content. Back on dead-tree, you owned the medium but licensed the content and I'm going to guess (I don't think it has been tried) that e-book readers have the same rights. In other words, you can probably transfer ownership of the device - including loaning it. If they change their username and whatnot, that's not really the same device.
Wow, that's clear as mud. I hope you can parse it better than I can write it. However, the important thing to realize is that you're licensing and not buying. You can make of that what you will but those are factual statements and are upheld by the highest courts in the land.
Again - I'm not saying that I agree with this situation, it's just that that's how the situation is. Most things are like a pendulum. At some point, it swings back. I have no idea how much more trouble they'll add on top of the current regulations/system before that pendulum swings back.
I've given the math and process some logical thinking. That means it's likely wrong. Based on my observations (and guesses as to the mechanisms) you're kind of screwed until you get it back up there.
However, your comment makes me curious... I thought the most one could accumulate would be a -1 total ranking. It should be (if my observations are correct - and it appears they might not be) that a single comment gets to go below a total of -1 and any votes beyond that don't actually help/hinder.
Unfortunately, I have no way to test this reliably and karma is no longer displayed as a number. I'm sure the numbers are still retained.
The reason you appear to be kind of screwed is that all comments (unless moderated down) influence your rating. That's not that clear.
I post at 1 by default, as a logged in user. All posts add +1 to karma totals, just for posting it. I turned on my karma bonus to test something. I get +1 (base of 2) to posts. Unless moderated down, each post results in +2 to karma total database field. I my post is moderated 0, I do not lose any karma, I do not gain any. If my post is -1, I lose a point of karma. It first wipes the bonus point. Votes that bring me below -1 (total) or +5 (total) do not count - or so I was given to understand.
I'm not sure how a single comment can do that? It seems odd, to say the least. It seems like a shitty way to start people off. If one post can do what happened to you, maybe there is some merit into changing the system - perhaps a little. If trolling posts were a pattern then I'd not sympathize. One way to resolve this might be to just explain how it works.
So, if my karma got hit then I could just post at 1 (which reads as 2 to you) 50 times a day and gain 100 karma points (until moderated). That means anyone trying to moderate my posts down to a daily negative would need 100 mod points to do so - I'm a prolific.
That said, I do wish they'd bring back numeric karma. I'd really enjoy it as I like to watch systems and see how they work. Alternatively, they could give a detailed explanation and save us some time.
Oh, ha! You must be SEVERELY limited on the number of posts you can make. You can reply (if you want) via AC or email and save your post for something meaningful.
Gamers have their identity tied to so many things, potentially.
"My console, OS, paddle, computer, brand RAM, authors, etc. are all better than your choices and I need affirmation from others who have made the same choices I have made and to sneer at those who chose not just poorly but wrong!"
Many, many vocal proponents of Linux are like that. They are zealots and, sadly, many probably have some serious mental issues because they're so closely tying themselves to an OS, code, or ideals. They come not just from the Linux bench, they come from all sides - especially the Apple folks.
Funny enough, once upon a time an Apple user was expected to be quite computer literate. That's a subject for another day.
Like you, I use Linux because it works for me. I don't care what others chose. I don't need anyone to tell me that I made a good choice - but I did accept (and still do accept) suggestions. I like simplicity, functionality, and ease. I went with Lubuntu as my last choice for my distro. 16.04 is coming right up. They're changing to LXQt and I may not like it. So, I may pick something else. I may just roll my own.
So yeah, I definitely agree. Linux helps me get stuff done. I don't have to tweak it to get it to stay out of my way. I can tweak it if I want to. I'm not even a FOSS zealot or activist. I just use what works for me, in a manner that I understand, and with the risks/rewards justifications done to my satisfaction. I've never been really able to figure out who started the idea that Linux was going to be king of the desktop nor have I figured out why anyone would want to hold that title.
Heh, yeah. I know that *now.* I did not know that *then.* I do wonder how much of it is cultural or outright practice.
As for the TL;DR, there's no real shorter version that has any weight. That is the short version.:/
I could have said, "Fuck you Oracle. Oracle sucks." That might not have the same value. It might... Hopefully, someone sees it and goes into their next vendor meeting armed with the brilliant idea of reading your contracts, asking questions, and not backing down to legal threats. I guess, I probably should have been more clear about the NDA. That was still in effect even though we'd terminated our relationship. I want to say that the NDA wasn't with Oracle themselves but by either a VAR or something similar. Damn, that was years ago.
At any rate, they wanted to disallow us from disclosing that they'd sued us and we won. The judge tossed their request for a gag order or whatever its specific legal name is.
Oh, I learned to *never* introduce myself as "Doctor KGIII" anywhere. That's why I said, "When people introduce me as Doctor..." My ego isn't that frail. At first, I only tried it because I figured it was shorter to say, "Doctor KGIII." I figured I'd not have to explain it and repeat myself. I was wrong. I was very, very wrong.
The questions about practicum, internship, and clinical were disorienting. One of my first, non-alumni, experiences using the title resulted in myriad questions on those very subjects - with few/no people asking about what field I'd earned my degree. I got/get (not so frequent these days) more questions about where I went than most other subjects. As for my specialty, an answer in 'pattern matching, predictive analytics, and situational specific optimizations based on correlation with systemic normative values, coupled with data-specific modeling, as well as correlation with atypical scenarios with a goal of of increased safety, decreased cost, and greater utilitarian functionality' does not, by any stretch, actually help matters any.
Yes, it turns out that baffling them with bullshit doesn't mean that they are the least bit dissuaded from asking you if their mole is likely malignant or benign. I can tell them that the odds are slim. I can not do a biopsy on Monday to take a look at it. Well, I can but my doing so is assuming a whole lot of liability and probably not actually going to help.
So, I *never* introduce myself as a doctor. There's nothing good that can come from that. I actually kind of hate it when others do. I get it, I appreciate it. No, it's not really all that special. I've heard the equivalent to, "Oh, you're still a doctor. You must be smart. You know more about this stuff than I do!" Yes, yes I have been exposed to idiots. And I am smart, I'm smart enough to not accept liability for giving out medical advice to people genuinely concerned with their health-care. I'm just not smart in the ways of that fancy doctorin' or nuttin.'
Yeah, I like the TurboVNC viewer. I just keep it as a full-screen and key-combo out of it. It works well BUT (and that's a big but) I'm acclimated to it and *very* familiar with it. I like it because I can use a slower machine and just pipe things like compiling off to something else. I like it because I can split resources up. I can absolutely understand* that not many will be able to "work" like I do. I just drop it to the task-bar while not in use, I might even throw them up on separate virtual desktops, I might even toss them up on multiple monitors but (strangely) I'm not too keen on multiple monitor** setups.
It helps that I've ample resources to host all sorts of viewer clients. I really, really like that. I would like to learn more and do more with the X window forwarding. I can see some ways that that would be really beneficial - maybe I'll learn more about it when Wayland is pushed out on me. I suspect, strongly, that I won't be one of the people who is irate by it being pushed on me. If I want, I can spin up my own damned distro. I can even turn it into a Live USB distro AND throw in persistent data and take it with me and call it KGIIIOS. I don't even get mad about systemd. It doesn't interfere with anything that I do. I do wish there were options for those who do not prefer it - and by options, I mean well supported options with a decent community.***
*: I've never really been one of those people. "It doesn't work for me. I don't see a use for it. I don't need it." Therefore, nobody wants it, needs it, or can use it. **: I've done some *nice* multiple monitor configurations since I retired. I confess to having a nice bezel-free configuration. I do not work at that. I don't like more than 3 and I'm fine with just one. I actually prefer a single monitor but I did recently propose a different "monitor" that I'd jump on. (Will explain if requested.) ***: Which makes me wonder why, if there are so many of them and they're as talented as they claim****, why they don't just make a distro? ****: Not really a slight, they're the ones who made the claim about being experts. I, a non-expert, could make a distro without systemd. I couldn't maintain it but it'd work. I could maintain it but not for anything meaningful - it would seriously lag behind on security fixes unless i somehow managed to tie in with something like the Ubuntu ecosystem.
Yeah, I kind of figured but hadn't checked, thanks. I guess my question was hoping to be more specific - as in, how the hell did that happen? I could trace it back by going through all of their posts to find the beginning but that looks like work.
On the other hand, I'm not really sure what you have to do to get bad karma. I've even had people threaten (and then try) to vote down all of my comments. I have never once, nor will I ever, say something (or not say something) because of karma. Fuck that. If I've got something to say, I say it - if it's important enough for me to think it worth saying. I'll even stand up for (when it's justified) Microsoft - even though I'm certainly not using their OS to post this. I'll say bad things (when true) about Linux - even though I'm using it to post this.
WTF do you have to do to get bad karma? I get "off-topic" sometimes - and, indeed, I am. Hell, I'm off-topic right now. I'm off-topic more often than I am on-topic. If I am on-topic, it was probably by accident! Even still, nada... I'm not even sure if I could have bad karma?
Seeing as I'm this far off-topic... One of the confusing ones is "troll." Oh, don't get me wrong. I have been known to troll - strict definition only. That is, not just to be a jackass but to gather a response based on little effort and to cause meaningless outrage. More often than not, those get modded up. Yet, the insightful things (to me) get moderated troll. I don't mind, I really don't. What I do is find it confusing. I think it's just a knee-jerk thing and I'm in a position where I really don't have to worry about being thought trolling when I was actually just pointing out something (topical) that people don't want to hear. Meh, usually that gets fixed in short order.
Hmm... Come to think of it, I don't think I've really meandered off-topic for a while. Purely accidental, I assure you. Slashdot is my personal blog.
You know, there's a bit of history that I've never shared on Slashdot and it concerns Oracle. As tempting as it is to type that out, I'm really not in the mood for a novella this evening - and you probably aren't in the mood for one either.
The short of it is that I had a salesman in, back in the late 1990s, who wanted to help my company out. By this time, I was already weary (and leery) of such but they had a good idea and a product name that I recognized as being industry-leading. (You can see where this is going, right?) I don't want to mention any names but there's One Raging Asshole Called Larry Ellison - and I guess he kind of owns the joint.
Now, I don't know what kind of ship (see what I did there?) he runs over there but they have some smooth-talking guys who are actually very well researched. Or, at the time they did. Consider, at the time, this was cutting edge stuff that we were doing and not exactly popular. But these guys knew things about relational databases, joins, parts, searching, indexing, and all these things - and they were happy to give me an education so that I knew all about those things to. And I listened.
It should be noted that I didn't just listen, I asked questions. I didn't just ask them questions - I asked my peers questions. I didn't just ask my peers questions, I asked the people who worked with me questions. I do that, I ask a lot of questions because, contrary to popular opinion, I do not know everything.
So, the short story is that we invited them in. Now, I have shared that part of the story before. It took some time for our DB wizard to return to normal and get over his angry phase but the ship (see what I did there) was righted anew.
Anyhow, they fought, fiddled, exported, and joined, and attached, and merged. They networked and peeked and poked. They were not working with live data, of course. They attempted to get it to communicate with the network and function and do database type things. They spent the better part of six months, as I recall, visiting and testing and poking. They brought in hardware, and boxes, and people. They stomped through and gave promises. Contracts were even signed. More on that in a moment.
And it never worked. Ever. It never came close to working.
Now I don't know if our Wizard sabotaged this. I kind of doubt he did. He wasn't that... Well, no... He was that kind of guy but I don't think he did. I'd have no way of knowing if he did but I suspect he'd have let it slip if he had. It might have been maniacal laughter when they left but that's not what he did. The important part of this is that it never, ever worked.
So, we gave 'em the boot. We had important things to do and they were in the way and slowing us down. We're also working with data that doesn't really belong to us and having to vet an extra ten people stomping in and out of the server room is not acceptable. They leave...
A little while later, in comes a lawsuit. They want an almost 7 figure some of money. Now, I don't know what they were expecting but - if you go back to the earlier part of this message, you'll notice that I ask a lot of questions. The contract that I'd signed, I'd signed it personally, was quite specific in that the job needed to be completed to my satisfaction and that the installation was at their cost. It would appear that they were billing someone (whom I do not know) thousands of dollars a day for that work.
And someone, whom I still do not know, was buying hardware - all that hardware they'd brought in was someone else's expense. I do believe the contract stated we were to pay for hardware, by the way. We didn't keep any of that hardware, use any of that hardware, ask for any of that hardware, sign for any of that hardware, or even really have any room for it - this was pre-expansion.
So, they wanted us to pay for people we did not hire, who did work we could not use. They wanted us to pay for software - and maintenance for some years, that was not installed. They wanted us to pay for hardware we did
I'll preface this by saying that I am not a DB guy. I hate the task and it was one of the first things I hired someone else to do. I don't know how DB admins do their work, I call them wizards.
So, I know some wizards who are otherwise fairly die-hard Linux users (not so much zealots) and even a few wizards that are true OS X aficionados. Of this group, there is a subset that actually prefers Microsoft SQL Server. Me? I find Lotus Notes to be a pain in the ass, fragile, and difficult to configure. (That also tells you a bit about both my age and how long ago it was when I realized how much I hated DB work.) However, this subset of people can even explain why they prefer it.
I believe their explanation goes into details with some features, some speed, scalability, and reliability. I lack the expertise of even care to opine. I'm merely pointing out that some people, for reasons they seem to understand, prefer it over the other choices. I will say that my experience with Oracle was the straw that broke the camel's proverbial back. I'm fine with comma separated values and flat text files, thanks. Anything more complicated than that and I'm gonna need an installer and a nice little GUI like phpMyAdmin. That still might not be enough but I'm smart enough to keep lots and lots of backups. I got the import and export functionality down, good thing.
Yeah, it looks like some mention of it in the 60s (according to Wikipedia) and then not much of anything until the 1980s and it does look like Feynman was speculating about fifty years out (if I remember the talk well enough). So no, no serious discussion of it in the 1970s was speculating that it was five years out. At least not that I can find. Your link doesn't change that.
As a person who pays a bunch of taxes and did not support the government doing such things, you're wanting me to pay for it again? First, I had to pay the money that let them do it. Then, I had to pay for the loss of reputation and business associated with it - which is a bit abstract. Now, you want me to pay for the cleanup. All while I've adamantly expressed disdain for the practice...
*sighs* I guess it's a good thing if you don't earn/have enough to pay much in taxes. So, there's that. I suppose you'll be wanting me to pay the government so that the government can pay the victims.
Because it's a pissing match and, before you point and laugh at them, you might want to consider where they learned the behavior from. Tying one's identity to an operating system is stupid. It's akin to the way the US plays politics like a team sport.
I've been pondering a rebuttal for Franklin's quote for a while. I see it misquoted, mistaken, misused. I'm not saying that's the case with your usage. I'm also in full agreement with his expressed sentiment.
But...
What happens when the majority is no longer convinced of the need for liberty and what does that mean for the rest of us?
It's disheartening. One minute, the same person will rant about how encryption is necessary and that we shouldn't legislate based on fear and the next minute they're arguing that we should take away all rights to bear arms. They can't, and won't, admit that they're basing their position on cowardice and are, quite expressly, wanting to give up liberties in exchange for safety. They scoff at those who believe that they'll be safer if the government has a back door into encryption - and rightfully so. But, when it's their fear, they're all gung-ho to give up their liberties. They value the liberties they do not enjoy/use less than they value their safety. Disheartening is the best word I can think of.
So, what do you do when it's the vocal minority or true majority that wants to give up those liberties in the name of safety? It's obvious that anarchy is not a solution and that reasonable lines must be drawn. The question is where?
I keep returning to trying to figure out what he meant by "temporary." All I can conclude is that he was being pithy and rhetorical and, while not wrong, he's not really said anything that anyone shouldn't already know. Unfortunately, unless pressed, most people are cowards and seem to be quite willing to give up their liberties. That and, well... All things are temporary.
I'd like to see (and I'm willing to help fund) similar platforms being run by the government. For cost and security reasons, it should be an option for just the one service.
Note: That does not mean that the government should be taking over private services nor does it mean that they should be exclusively provisioned by them - one might say they'd be exclusively for government usage and not for public use except as a method of having information disseminated to them. Obviously, varied levels of interaction and permissions are preferred.
The State should not be using Twitter. The State should have their own service with similar features. Then, depending on the charter of the agency, they should allow/disallow interaction from the general public with the preference being as much reasonable interaction as is possible.
I'd speculate that the platform, but not the hosting of said platform, should be open and standardized. The software atop it should also be open and free of copyright restrictions for all citizens as they will have funded its creation.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, Moot is moot now. I guess he has been since he sold the place. Ah well, it's a Moot point.
*is not proud of this post*
The powers that be view it like this...
The hardware was on US soil. The alleged crime took place at that physical point. The crime is on US soil.
'Snot my fault but that's their reasoning. It makes sense, at least at first blush it does. People should lock their doors but it's still a crime to enter an unlocked home in my jurisdiction.
Non-sequitur. It does not follow, for those playing the home game. Hacking an account is illegal. To say that if she'd not had encrypted email on there that it is not a crime is, well... Stupid. I'm not sure who moderated you up.
Even if she had done no wrong, his actions are still illegal. They are different crimes (maybe) but they are still going to be charged with other crimes.
There's a documentary called "The Worst Town on the Internet" and it has him in there. He didn't think he did much wrong and was pissed about having gotten a long sentence in his come country. He's gotta be right pissed now that he's gotta come to the US and face more time.
A couple of things...
I do not moderate -- ever. Even though I can, I do not. I have my reasons.
Moderators can moderate however they see fit. You do not get to tell them how to spend their points.
Get an account if you don't want to be rate-limited.
While they both are about Apple, your comment is off-topic, at best. Trolling at worst. You were +1 at the time, that's overrated.
I do notice a trend. You seem to think others are obligated to behave in a manner that suits you - without regards for others feel on the subject. You seem to think you've got both power and insight. You seem to have an ego larger than its worth. You don't get to decide how someone moderates your post. You don't get to pick how often you're allowed to post. You don't get to change the subject to what you want to discuss as opposed to the topic.
In short, you're basically saying, "Don't tell me what to do." While, at the same time, saying, "Do what I say." Whatever makes you think you're entitled to be given consideration? I can assure you, you're not special nor are you in charge. You're a guest on someone else's hardware, act like it.
Well, act like it if you want to be heard. Just get a damned account if you want your posts seen.
You're not purchasing it. You're licensing it. Hopefully you can find someone to sell it to you (not license it to you) at a price you and they can agree on. Note the difference in verbiage. That's essential and important to understand.
When you "buy" a track at iTunes then you're not buying it, you're licensing it. Your OS is probably licensed and not purchased. Even in Linux that is somewhat true. I do not own the code on my computer. If I did own it then I could close it up.
Now, please don't hate me for bringing you this news. I am not the person in charge. I am not the boss. That's just how it works and I would like to see it done differently, at least to some extent.
You don't buy a book. Even before, you didn't buy the contents of the book. You paid for the book. You never had ownership of the content. You had a license to use the content. You were free to trade or sell the contents. I suspect that one could transfer ownership of the device the e-books are loaded onto and win that battle in court. You can, almost certainly, loan it - irrespective of the EULA terminology.
But, even with a book, you've never owned it. If you did own it (it'd be a work-for-hire) then you'd be able to make as many copies of it as you want AND sell those copies. You were, even back in the day, licensing the content. Back on dead-tree, you owned the medium but licensed the content and I'm going to guess (I don't think it has been tried) that e-book readers have the same rights. In other words, you can probably transfer ownership of the device - including loaning it. If they change their username and whatnot, that's not really the same device.
Wow, that's clear as mud. I hope you can parse it better than I can write it. However, the important thing to realize is that you're licensing and not buying. You can make of that what you will but those are factual statements and are upheld by the highest courts in the land.
Again - I'm not saying that I agree with this situation, it's just that that's how the situation is. Most things are like a pendulum. At some point, it swings back. I have no idea how much more trouble they'll add on top of the current regulations/system before that pendulum swings back.
I've given the math and process some logical thinking. That means it's likely wrong. Based on my observations (and guesses as to the mechanisms) you're kind of screwed until you get it back up there.
However, your comment makes me curious... I thought the most one could accumulate would be a -1 total ranking. It should be (if my observations are correct - and it appears they might not be) that a single comment gets to go below a total of -1 and any votes beyond that don't actually help/hinder.
Unfortunately, I have no way to test this reliably and karma is no longer displayed as a number. I'm sure the numbers are still retained.
The reason you appear to be kind of screwed is that all comments (unless moderated down) influence your rating. That's not that clear.
I post at 1 by default, as a logged in user. All posts add +1 to karma totals, just for posting it.
I turned on my karma bonus to test something. I get +1 (base of 2) to posts. Unless moderated down, each post results in +2 to karma total database field.
I my post is moderated 0, I do not lose any karma, I do not gain any.
If my post is -1, I lose a point of karma. It first wipes the bonus point.
Votes that bring me below -1 (total) or +5 (total) do not count - or so I was given to understand.
I'm not sure how a single comment can do that? It seems odd, to say the least. It seems like a shitty way to start people off. If one post can do what happened to you, maybe there is some merit into changing the system - perhaps a little. If trolling posts were a pattern then I'd not sympathize. One way to resolve this might be to just explain how it works.
So, if my karma got hit then I could just post at 1 (which reads as 2 to you) 50 times a day and gain 100 karma points (until moderated). That means anyone trying to moderate my posts down to a daily negative would need 100 mod points to do so - I'm a prolific.
That said, I do wish they'd bring back numeric karma. I'd really enjoy it as I like to watch systems and see how they work. Alternatively, they could give a detailed explanation and save us some time.
Oh, ha! You must be SEVERELY limited on the number of posts you can make. You can reply (if you want) via AC or email and save your post for something meaningful.
Gamers have their identity tied to so many things, potentially.
"My console, OS, paddle, computer, brand RAM, authors, etc. are all better than your choices and I need affirmation from others who have made the same choices I have made and to sneer at those who chose not just poorly but wrong!"
Many, many vocal proponents of Linux are like that. They are zealots and, sadly, many probably have some serious mental issues because they're so closely tying themselves to an OS, code, or ideals. They come not just from the Linux bench, they come from all sides - especially the Apple folks.
Funny enough, once upon a time an Apple user was expected to be quite computer literate. That's a subject for another day.
Like you, I use Linux because it works for me. I don't care what others chose. I don't need anyone to tell me that I made a good choice - but I did accept (and still do accept) suggestions. I like simplicity, functionality, and ease. I went with Lubuntu as my last choice for my distro. 16.04 is coming right up. They're changing to LXQt and I may not like it. So, I may pick something else. I may just roll my own.
So yeah, I definitely agree. Linux helps me get stuff done. I don't have to tweak it to get it to stay out of my way. I can tweak it if I want to. I'm not even a FOSS zealot or activist. I just use what works for me, in a manner that I understand, and with the risks/rewards justifications done to my satisfaction. I've never been really able to figure out who started the idea that Linux was going to be king of the desktop nor have I figured out why anyone would want to hold that title.
Heh, yeah. I know that *now.* I did not know that *then.* I do wonder how much of it is cultural or outright practice.
As for the TL;DR, there's no real shorter version that has any weight. That is the short version. :/
I could have said, "Fuck you Oracle. Oracle sucks." That might not have the same value. It might... Hopefully, someone sees it and goes into their next vendor meeting armed with the brilliant idea of reading your contracts, asking questions, and not backing down to legal threats. I guess, I probably should have been more clear about the NDA. That was still in effect even though we'd terminated our relationship. I want to say that the NDA wasn't with Oracle themselves but by either a VAR or something similar. Damn, that was years ago.
At any rate, they wanted to disallow us from disclosing that they'd sued us and we won. The judge tossed their request for a gag order or whatever its specific legal name is.
Oh, I learned to *never* introduce myself as "Doctor KGIII" anywhere. That's why I said, "When people introduce me as Doctor ..." My ego isn't that frail. At first, I only tried it because I figured it was shorter to say, "Doctor KGIII." I figured I'd not have to explain it and repeat myself. I was wrong. I was very, very wrong.
The questions about practicum, internship, and clinical were disorienting. One of my first, non-alumni, experiences using the title resulted in myriad questions on those very subjects - with few/no people asking about what field I'd earned my degree. I got/get (not so frequent these days) more questions about where I went than most other subjects. As for my specialty, an answer in 'pattern matching, predictive analytics, and situational specific optimizations based on correlation with systemic normative values, coupled with data-specific modeling, as well as correlation with atypical scenarios with a goal of of increased safety, decreased cost, and greater utilitarian functionality' does not, by any stretch, actually help matters any.
Yes, it turns out that baffling them with bullshit doesn't mean that they are the least bit dissuaded from asking you if their mole is likely malignant or benign. I can tell them that the odds are slim. I can not do a biopsy on Monday to take a look at it. Well, I can but my doing so is assuming a whole lot of liability and probably not actually going to help.
So, I *never* introduce myself as a doctor. There's nothing good that can come from that. I actually kind of hate it when others do. I get it, I appreciate it. No, it's not really all that special. I've heard the equivalent to, "Oh, you're still a doctor. You must be smart. You know more about this stuff than I do!" Yes, yes I have been exposed to idiots. And I am smart, I'm smart enough to not accept liability for giving out medical advice to people genuinely concerned with their health-care. I'm just not smart in the ways of that fancy doctorin' or nuttin.'
Yeah, I like the TurboVNC viewer. I just keep it as a full-screen and key-combo out of it. It works well BUT (and that's a big but) I'm acclimated to it and *very* familiar with it. I like it because I can use a slower machine and just pipe things like compiling off to something else. I like it because I can split resources up. I can absolutely understand* that not many will be able to "work" like I do. I just drop it to the task-bar while not in use, I might even throw them up on separate virtual desktops, I might even toss them up on multiple monitors but (strangely) I'm not too keen on multiple monitor** setups.
It helps that I've ample resources to host all sorts of viewer clients. I really, really like that. I would like to learn more and do more with the X window forwarding. I can see some ways that that would be really beneficial - maybe I'll learn more about it when Wayland is pushed out on me. I suspect, strongly, that I won't be one of the people who is irate by it being pushed on me. If I want, I can spin up my own damned distro. I can even turn it into a Live USB distro AND throw in persistent data and take it with me and call it KGIIIOS. I don't even get mad about systemd. It doesn't interfere with anything that I do. I do wish there were options for those who do not prefer it - and by options, I mean well supported options with a decent community.***
*: I've never really been one of those people. "It doesn't work for me. I don't see a use for it. I don't need it." Therefore, nobody wants it, needs it, or can use it.
**: I've done some *nice* multiple monitor configurations since I retired. I confess to having a nice bezel-free configuration. I do not work at that. I don't like more than 3 and I'm fine with just one. I actually prefer a single monitor but I did recently propose a different "monitor" that I'd jump on. (Will explain if requested.)
***: Which makes me wonder why, if there are so many of them and they're as talented as they claim****, why they don't just make a distro?
****: Not really a slight, they're the ones who made the claim about being experts. I, a non-expert, could make a distro without systemd. I couldn't maintain it but it'd work. I could maintain it but not for anything meaningful - it would seriously lag behind on security fixes unless i somehow managed to tie in with something like the Ubuntu ecosystem.
Yeah, I kind of figured but hadn't checked, thanks. I guess my question was hoping to be more specific - as in, how the hell did that happen? I could trace it back by going through all of their posts to find the beginning but that looks like work.
On the other hand, I'm not really sure what you have to do to get bad karma. I've even had people threaten (and then try) to vote down all of my comments. I have never once, nor will I ever, say something (or not say something) because of karma. Fuck that. If I've got something to say, I say it - if it's important enough for me to think it worth saying. I'll even stand up for (when it's justified) Microsoft - even though I'm certainly not using their OS to post this. I'll say bad things (when true) about Linux - even though I'm using it to post this.
WTF do you have to do to get bad karma? I get "off-topic" sometimes - and, indeed, I am. Hell, I'm off-topic right now. I'm off-topic more often than I am on-topic. If I am on-topic, it was probably by accident! Even still, nada... I'm not even sure if I could have bad karma?
Seeing as I'm this far off-topic... One of the confusing ones is "troll." Oh, don't get me wrong. I have been known to troll - strict definition only. That is, not just to be a jackass but to gather a response based on little effort and to cause meaningless outrage. More often than not, those get modded up. Yet, the insightful things (to me) get moderated troll. I don't mind, I really don't. What I do is find it confusing. I think it's just a knee-jerk thing and I'm in a position where I really don't have to worry about being thought trolling when I was actually just pointing out something (topical) that people don't want to hear. Meh, usually that gets fixed in short order.
Hmm... Come to think of it, I don't think I've really meandered off-topic for a while. Purely accidental, I assure you. Slashdot is my personal blog.
Your UID is a prime number.
I know, I know... This is off-topic but, damn it, it's important to me!
I even went and found you a link to show it:
http://www.numberempire.com/pr...
You know, there's a bit of history that I've never shared on Slashdot and it concerns Oracle. As tempting as it is to type that out, I'm really not in the mood for a novella this evening - and you probably aren't in the mood for one either.
The short of it is that I had a salesman in, back in the late 1990s, who wanted to help my company out. By this time, I was already weary (and leery) of such but they had a good idea and a product name that I recognized as being industry-leading. (You can see where this is going, right?) I don't want to mention any names but there's One Raging Asshole Called Larry Ellison - and I guess he kind of owns the joint.
Now, I don't know what kind of ship (see what I did there?) he runs over there but they have some smooth-talking guys who are actually very well researched. Or, at the time they did. Consider, at the time, this was cutting edge stuff that we were doing and not exactly popular. But these guys knew things about relational databases, joins, parts, searching, indexing, and all these things - and they were happy to give me an education so that I knew all about those things to. And I listened.
It should be noted that I didn't just listen, I asked questions. I didn't just ask them questions - I asked my peers questions. I didn't just ask my peers questions, I asked the people who worked with me questions. I do that, I ask a lot of questions because, contrary to popular opinion, I do not know everything.
So, the short story is that we invited them in. Now, I have shared that part of the story before. It took some time for our DB wizard to return to normal and get over his angry phase but the ship (see what I did there) was righted anew.
Anyhow, they fought, fiddled, exported, and joined, and attached, and merged. They networked and peeked and poked. They were not working with live data, of course. They attempted to get it to communicate with the network and function and do database type things. They spent the better part of six months, as I recall, visiting and testing and poking. They brought in hardware, and boxes, and people. They stomped through and gave promises. Contracts were even signed. More on that in a moment.
And it never worked. Ever. It never came close to working.
Now I don't know if our Wizard sabotaged this. I kind of doubt he did. He wasn't that... Well, no... He was that kind of guy but I don't think he did. I'd have no way of knowing if he did but I suspect he'd have let it slip if he had. It might have been maniacal laughter when they left but that's not what he did. The important part of this is that it never, ever worked.
So, we gave 'em the boot. We had important things to do and they were in the way and slowing us down. We're also working with data that doesn't really belong to us and having to vet an extra ten people stomping in and out of the server room is not acceptable. They leave...
A little while later, in comes a lawsuit. They want an almost 7 figure some of money. Now, I don't know what they were expecting but - if you go back to the earlier part of this message, you'll notice that I ask a lot of questions. The contract that I'd signed, I'd signed it personally, was quite specific in that the job needed to be completed to my satisfaction and that the installation was at their cost. It would appear that they were billing someone (whom I do not know) thousands of dollars a day for that work.
And someone, whom I still do not know, was buying hardware - all that hardware they'd brought in was someone else's expense. I do believe the contract stated we were to pay for hardware, by the way. We didn't keep any of that hardware, use any of that hardware, ask for any of that hardware, sign for any of that hardware, or even really have any room for it - this was pre-expansion.
So, they wanted us to pay for people we did not hire, who did work we could not use. They wanted us to pay for software - and maintenance for some years, that was not installed. They wanted us to pay for hardware we did
I'll preface this by saying that I am not a DB guy. I hate the task and it was one of the first things I hired someone else to do. I don't know how DB admins do their work, I call them wizards.
So, I know some wizards who are otherwise fairly die-hard Linux users (not so much zealots) and even a few wizards that are true OS X aficionados. Of this group, there is a subset that actually prefers Microsoft SQL Server. Me? I find Lotus Notes to be a pain in the ass, fragile, and difficult to configure. (That also tells you a bit about both my age and how long ago it was when I realized how much I hated DB work.) However, this subset of people can even explain why they prefer it.
I believe their explanation goes into details with some features, some speed, scalability, and reliability. I lack the expertise of even care to opine. I'm merely pointing out that some people, for reasons they seem to understand, prefer it over the other choices. I will say that my experience with Oracle was the straw that broke the camel's proverbial back. I'm fine with comma separated values and flat text files, thanks. Anything more complicated than that and I'm gonna need an installer and a nice little GUI like phpMyAdmin. That still might not be enough but I'm smart enough to keep lots and lots of backups. I got the import and export functionality down, good thing.
Correct. I don't think anyone has made the claim that it is either of those two things. Thanks for stating the obvious, I guess.
Wait, how do you have a starting score of -1?
Yeah, it looks like some mention of it in the 60s (according to Wikipedia) and then not much of anything until the 1980s and it does look like Feynman was speculating about fifty years out (if I remember the talk well enough). So no, no serious discussion of it in the 1970s was speculating that it was five years out. At least not that I can find. Your link doesn't change that.
Given the DMCA, quite probably.
As a person who pays a bunch of taxes and did not support the government doing such things, you're wanting me to pay for it again? First, I had to pay the money that let them do it. Then, I had to pay for the loss of reputation and business associated with it - which is a bit abstract. Now, you want me to pay for the cleanup. All while I've adamantly expressed disdain for the practice...
*sighs* I guess it's a good thing if you don't earn/have enough to pay much in taxes. So, there's that. I suppose you'll be wanting me to pay the government so that the government can pay the victims.
It's not perfect, can't have it as an option! There are a lot of idiots who think in binary. They're not limited to just being geeks.
Because it's a pissing match and, before you point and laugh at them, you might want to consider where they learned the behavior from. Tying one's identity to an operating system is stupid. It's akin to the way the US plays politics like a team sport.
The biggest security hole (and also potentially greatest asset) is seated in the chair.
I've been pondering a rebuttal for Franklin's quote for a while. I see it misquoted, mistaken, misused. I'm not saying that's the case with your usage. I'm also in full agreement with his expressed sentiment.
But...
What happens when the majority is no longer convinced of the need for liberty and what does that mean for the rest of us?
It's disheartening. One minute, the same person will rant about how encryption is necessary and that we shouldn't legislate based on fear and the next minute they're arguing that we should take away all rights to bear arms. They can't, and won't, admit that they're basing their position on cowardice and are, quite expressly, wanting to give up liberties in exchange for safety. They scoff at those who believe that they'll be safer if the government has a back door into encryption - and rightfully so. But, when it's their fear, they're all gung-ho to give up their liberties. They value the liberties they do not enjoy/use less than they value their safety. Disheartening is the best word I can think of.
So, what do you do when it's the vocal minority or true majority that wants to give up those liberties in the name of safety? It's obvious that anarchy is not a solution and that reasonable lines must be drawn. The question is where?
I keep returning to trying to figure out what he meant by "temporary." All I can conclude is that he was being pithy and rhetorical and, while not wrong, he's not really said anything that anyone shouldn't already know. Unfortunately, unless pressed, most people are cowards and seem to be quite willing to give up their liberties. That and, well... All things are temporary.
I'd like to see (and I'm willing to help fund) similar platforms being run by the government. For cost and security reasons, it should be an option for just the one service.
Note: That does not mean that the government should be taking over private services nor does it mean that they should be exclusively provisioned by them - one might say they'd be exclusively for government usage and not for public use except as a method of having information disseminated to them. Obviously, varied levels of interaction and permissions are preferred.
The State should not be using Twitter. The State should have their own service with similar features. Then, depending on the charter of the agency, they should allow/disallow interaction from the general public with the preference being as much reasonable interaction as is possible.
I'd speculate that the platform, but not the hosting of said platform, should be open and standardized. The software atop it should also be open and free of copyright restrictions for all citizens as they will have funded its creation.