So, what do you do if you are in the middle of the war and you don't have the ability to transport the prisoner? What if holding them there may bring an attack that could get everyone killed? You're surrounded and you got the enemy wanting to come in after the VIP even though it is a fortified position, and they might be able to breach. What then? I would say at that point, "restraints" or not, the situation and the prisoner aren't exactly under control. Exedcuting them may be the only option to save the situation.
The victim was a part of a death squad. They could either execute him, which was likely their mission anyhow, and maybe catch others, or they could waste time trying to bring him back. Just because he "surrendered" doesn't mean it wasn't still a hostile war zone and he an enemy combatant.
I believe in due process, I really do. But war is hell. Sometimes you don't know what the right answer is at the moment.
Nobodies mentioned the excellent echo cancellation. Trust me, that matters. Plus it was clearer than anything I had tried when I first tried it several years ago. And they had cheap rates, and and and, it all for the most part just worked with all of the features.
Not as arrogant as someone who says "No, we don't care if we destroy the delicate balance and make everyone starve, we want to make a profit, so fuck you."
Still is apples and oranges, which is my point, that even mine was not a good one. Saying someone can't get a refreshment is one thing. Perhaps in even yours, it is if their is a tight schedule on the buses and you may miss it. It is impolite of them to not allow him to do as he pleases since he is a guest, but it is still their option. Is it fair that one university pays for a lecturer and nearby ones want to have them as a speaker although they don't want to contribute? How about companies that compete instead of universities? This is more what is happening here. It just happens they have wartime political and as well as locational rivalries. I am not even asking if that matters, because that is irrelevant directly to my point.
Software is different than travel. If you ask me for a ride or I offer one to the store, and I say no, I don't want you also to go somewhere else while we are out on foot but to stay with me, is that unreasonable? You're comparing apples to oranges.
A better solution would be to ask Isreal if they would like to fund the trip, and then if they agree offer to speak in both places. That gives Isreal the chance to make Palestine look bad and say don't bother coming. If both parties agree, then it makes Palestine look bad. If Israel refuses to fund the trip, then they have no reason to complain. No matter what the man said in the email, he is disappointed, or angry that RMS would not just refuse to spread his message to either side. Sometimes you have to show some love to those that aren't, that is the only way to defeat hate, is with love.
Most garage inventors spend a crapload of time (and money) inventing and patenting things that they have no intention of making. Instead, they sell the patent to companies that will make the invention. Take that away, and you're essentially saying that only large companies with large manufacturing arms should ever be able to get a patent, and small inventors had best seek employment at one of them if they want to earn anything.
How do you get that only large companies with large manufacturing arms can only make some inventions? Why can't they get investment and still make it "themselves"? At the least sub-license/contract it out? I really don't see anything but good in taking away the ability to patent something with no intention of making it. Sure, our culture has made it sometimes difficult, but that is only because of and reinforced by the way things are, which is no reason to continue. Undoing this injustice do the system will help put us on the correct path to sanity and setup to allow inventors to make things without feeling they HAVE to sell the patents to large companies who've become oligarchies.
Why would a map show a "run" (course) in distance (parsecs) when that unit of measurement is obviously used in a way such as a car's 0-60 speed(but in this case distance instead of speed)?
It is isn't it? Matter almost seems to have this attractive force....;) But yes, it is weird and interesting, but other phenomena has exhibited similar "web like lines" as you describe it, due to an attractive pull. I do believe that usually a lack of opposing force or push (like the space vacuum for stars, i.e. pull unimpeded) helps to facilitate.
Well apparently he can't read yet wants others to. (Typical coward...) Just because it's called redshifted, it often is used to describe a shifts period, unless you need to be specific and then you might say blue. Don't blame me, it's like crackers being called hackers. Related yes, same thing no, but that is how it is used.
While of course rarer, I am pretty sure there are objects moving toward the Milky Way. IF that isn't represented, it should be noted. Perhaps it was in that key, but sparse keys will lead to confusion. I am sure I am not the only one who made an error if I did because they don't understand esoteric symbols, but can still comprehend the significance.
If that is correct, does green mean on the same vector?
Also, it would appear that the universe within 380 millions years was not expanding but contracting, at least it appears to have more blue to me than red.
What would be neat is if they re-did the map with positions adjusted for the "redshift" where you could compare by toggling quickly back and forth, to get an idea of how much difference there is between what we see due to speed of light and the time for it to hit our eyes from the star, and what we believe to actually be said positions from redshifting. Even more awesome would be a time slider where the colors changed to red/blue if the relative vector changed.
But then, while they say 3d, I only see a 2d image, so I don't know if they've actually mapped out positions in 3d space or just merely color coded the redshift. If that took ten years, I guess we'll have to wait for quantum computers to do all of the heavy lifting automagically.
IMHO, it's always the user's fault, to a certain extent, if only because they chose an inept OS security wise. Or perhaps they didn't want to deal with the hassle of a "locked down" system. But that extent only extends past where the assholes who wrote the malware in the first place responsibilities end.
It's all a matter of convenience, but for me, security is king, for without that it isn't worth the risk to begin with.Mostly because we don't live in an ideal world. But with OS's like Windows wanting to hold users hands and set them up with bad user practices right out of the box just so they make another nickel, we've come along way in reinforcing that we don't really need to get serious about security. And that, is very sad.
If texting while driving is like driving drunk, then running windows is worse that either as far as "surfing" the net goes. I haven't once got malware in Gnu/LInux, and yet, users EXPECT it in windows to happen some time. I was happy with Windows 7, but I was stupid, I should have known better. My girlfriend still got something on it, and she is one of the more aware users.
If you read the comments to that article, you'd know there's no way Microsoft is responsible for that decision. The regulatory bodies would axe the deal if Microsoft started telling Skype what to do before the deal is approved.
You sir have no idea how the world often really works. Many things are decided by powerful people behind closed doors, and many "powerful" people jump from the big companies to the regulatory bodies and back, getting promotions all the way. They may not have had something to do with it in this case, but do I believe Microsoft has never done anything unethical that would save/make them tons of cash? Wait, what? Almost forgot who we were talking about....
copying is akin to sharing. Stealing is taking something not meant to be shared. It is still copying if I share a movie/song and meant to, i.e. with a friend. If you take it from the publisher's servers and had to crack to get to it, that is stealing.
It is Sony's fault, but it's not the victims fault. I still remember when I moved from small town New Mexico to Cleveland. It wasn't very long before my car was broken into, and it was "my fault" for leaving valuables in it. How is what happened to the victims of Sony's inept security, and victims of criminals who violated said inept security, their fault. That's akin to saying it's the fault of a rape victim for happening to be attractive towards a rapist. I'm not necessarily saying this is what you meant, but there sure are an awful lot of comments eluding that the victim who was stupid enough to use Sony deserves it.
It isn't "wholly" one's fault. However, with a but a few exceptions, we let most of what happens to us happen. If you stored a friend's expensive diamond jewellery (or left a kid and they were kidnapped, etc.) in your car, and it was stolen while you were living in Cleveland, I would bet she'd blame you. I don't live and Cleveland, and I know about Cleveland. No, you didn't and Sony customer's don't deserve it, but they did put themselves out there. Most here are being smug because they do it right now with the next bad boy corporation that will pop up on the radar.
Why can't you live in a world where you can provide details to Sony without worrying about having your identity stolen? Why can't you live in a world where you don't need to lock your car? Why do we need SSH and public key encryption? Why can't you live in a world where you don't have to worry about any crime against property or person? I say it's because we've build a society that is great about protecting the rights of the accused, but does little to protect the rights of the victims. If these guys get caught, the will be afforded every conceivable protection against prejudiced trials... yet there will be no such guarantees for the victims.
Why? Because people are evil in their hearts, that's why. Even under total surveillance people will still try to screw others over fi they think there is a chance to get away with it or they feel it is worth it.
Those rights are to protect the innocents. They are put on trial too, which is the purpose of a trial, or did you forget? I agree we don't protect the rights of the victims. Even the evil people luckily for the most part still see they are better off (for now) with protections of the accused. If we wanted to protect victims, we wouldn't send people to schools for criminals (jail and prison) and instead bring back indentured servitude, for example. But we let those that are evil twist and distort logic to where indentured servitude=slavery.
Mod parent insightful, not troll. He's right, it's not as if we haven't been warned that this info. is has easy transferability, and not securely watched over.
I agree with you quite a bit. However, I have to say that hardly anyone, even you, take security completely serious. It's not as if you never dreamed any of these companies could be "bad". You just don't care and are apathetic in a sense as virtually everyone is, since it is more convenient.
In the end, you can't trust any company. Ok, that isn't correct. I trust everyone. That is what all relationships are based on, even enemies. I trust an enemy will try to screw me over. I trust these companies will sell me out for the sake of their "shareholders", even if I was one.
Oh how much better the world would be if we did business with those self employed and perhaps even small business, instead of corporations. You hear all of the time, it isn't personal, it's just business. Bullshit. All business is personal, and anyone who says otherwise is just trying to shirk their civic responsibilities to their fellow man. Man is man because we work together, not because we can conquer each other. We conquered this earth together, and if we ever stop screwing each other over we can conquer virtually anything.
But we won't. We instead want to listen and laugh at Doomsday predictors. Stay short-sighted and live to excess, living void and unfulfilling, meaningless lives.
Right, translation. "We hate users because we have to work and can't make easy money like the big boys are doing. Even though that is what the users are complaining about. Who cares if people pay for something and we decide they don't get it because it hurts profits. We make more money by screwing over their speeds."
All of these arguments by the cowards are either obvious shills, or brainwashed into being shills. Only designed to confuse and take the discussion off point, we pay, and yet we get screwed. They are the ones doing all of the bitching and whining. We're just bringing up reasonable complaints.
We have your best interests at heart, since you are unable to think for or defend yourselves. We love you and are protecting you... from yourself. And those that might would want to do you harm, like yourself.
It isn't about us, it's about you. Without you, we'd be nothing, and then what would we do? So we just make it impossible as much as we can to have a free, err we mean wrong thought.
This. I've noticed that more and more people publish articles simply it seems to get people distracted and overcomplicating the real issues, often when there aren't any, other than someone wanting a piece of someone else's pie.
Exactly. I'm well aware that it takes money and construction to up the "bandwidth". The coward probably doesn't realise that my point is valid, since he is only looking to make excuses. I mean really, who here thinks that it is automagically added using a slider? What a tool. As if we weren't overpaying already, but then again I don't think he read the last part of my post.
And statistics. Even if it would only affect 2%, that won't be for long. They knew they had to put caps in now, because later it would cause too much backlash. Could it be that the "Internet" could be swamped by digital media? Perhaps, but they could always add more bandwidth. Although then that would hurt their earnings having to invest, much less being able to nickel and dime customers.
I wish companies like All-tel wouldn't have sold out. Though they weren't perfect, they had a lot going on right, and that is why they were successful. On one hand I am glad I am still with them, on the other, the rest of the family was moved to Verizon, eliminating one of the great reasons to join the same network.... But the big boys gobble up anyone that comes close to doing things right, so I don't see any reason to have much hope.
20 computers a month for the trillionth, much less all 60... trillion. A month with 20 computers for one digit still doesn't seem that straight forward.
Slashdot Mirror
So, what do you do if you are in the middle of the war and you don't have the ability to transport the prisoner? What if holding them there may bring an attack that could get everyone killed? You're surrounded and you got the enemy wanting to come in after the VIP even though it is a fortified position, and they might be able to breach. What then? I would say at that point, "restraints" or not, the situation and the prisoner aren't exactly under control. Exedcuting them may be the only option to save the situation.
The victim was a part of a death squad. They could either execute him, which was likely their mission anyhow, and maybe catch others, or they could waste time trying to bring him back. Just because he "surrendered" doesn't mean it wasn't still a hostile war zone and he an enemy combatant.
I believe in due process, I really do. But war is hell. Sometimes you don't know what the right answer is at the moment.
What if Siemens confidence evaporates and, August time, some of these vulns are not yet patched? Will they allow the presentation?
Who is they? If you mean the conference, well then they wouldn't exactly deserve the title "Black Hat", would they?
Nobodies mentioned the excellent echo cancellation. Trust me, that matters. Plus it was clearer than anything I had tried when I first tried it several years ago. And they had cheap rates, and and and, it all for the most part just worked with all of the features.
Not as arrogant as someone who says "No, we don't care if we destroy the delicate balance and make everyone starve, we want to make a profit, so fuck you."
Still is apples and oranges, which is my point, that even mine was not a good one. Saying someone can't get a refreshment is one thing. Perhaps in even yours, it is if their is a tight schedule on the buses and you may miss it. It is impolite of them to not allow him to do as he pleases since he is a guest, but it is still their option. Is it fair that one university pays for a lecturer and nearby ones want to have them as a speaker although they don't want to contribute? How about companies that compete instead of universities? This is more what is happening here. It just happens they have wartime political and as well as locational rivalries. I am not even asking if that matters, because that is irrelevant directly to my point.
Software is different than travel. If you ask me for a ride or I offer one to the store, and I say no, I don't want you also to go somewhere else while we are out on foot but to stay with me, is that unreasonable? You're comparing apples to oranges.
A better solution would be to ask Isreal if they would like to fund the trip, and then if they agree offer to speak in both places. That gives Isreal the chance to make Palestine look bad and say don't bother coming. If both parties agree, then it makes Palestine look bad. If Israel refuses to fund the trip, then they have no reason to complain. No matter what the man said in the email, he is disappointed, or angry that RMS would not just refuse to spread his message to either side. Sometimes you have to show some love to those that aren't, that is the only way to defeat hate, is with love.
Most garage inventors spend a crapload of time (and money) inventing and patenting things that they have no intention of making. Instead, they sell the patent to companies that will make the invention. Take that away, and you're essentially saying that only large companies with large manufacturing arms should ever be able to get a patent, and small inventors had best seek employment at one of them if they want to earn anything.
How do you get that only large companies with large manufacturing arms can only make some inventions? Why can't they get investment and still make it "themselves"? At the least sub-license/contract it out? I really don't see anything but good in taking away the ability to patent something with no intention of making it. Sure, our culture has made it sometimes difficult, but that is only because of and reinforced by the way things are, which is no reason to continue. Undoing this injustice do the system will help put us on the correct path to sanity and setup to allow inventors to make things without feeling they HAVE to sell the patents to large companies who've become oligarchies.
Der der der denk
Why would a map show a "run" (course) in distance (parsecs) when that unit of measurement is obviously used in a way such as a car's 0-60 speed(but in this case distance instead of speed)?
It is isn't it? Matter almost seems to have this attractive force.... ;) But yes, it is weird and interesting, but other phenomena has exhibited similar "web like lines" as you describe it, due to an attractive pull. I do believe that usually a lack of opposing force or push (like the space vacuum for stars, i.e. pull unimpeded) helps to facilitate.
Well apparently he can't read yet wants others to. (Typical coward...) Just because it's called redshifted, it often is used to describe a shifts period, unless you need to be specific and then you might say blue. Don't blame me, it's like crackers being called hackers. Related yes, same thing no, but that is how it is used.
While of course rarer, I am pretty sure there are objects moving toward the Milky Way. IF that isn't represented, it should be noted. Perhaps it was in that key, but sparse keys will lead to confusion. I am sure I am not the only one who made an error if I did because they don't understand esoteric symbols, but can still comprehend the significance.
If that is correct, does green mean on the same vector?
Also, it would appear that the universe within 380 millions years was not expanding but contracting, at least it appears to have more blue to me than red.
What would be neat is if they re-did the map with positions adjusted for the "redshift" where you could compare by toggling quickly back and forth, to get an idea of how much difference there is between what we see due to speed of light and the time for it to hit our eyes from the star, and what we believe to actually be said positions from redshifting. Even more awesome would be a time slider where the colors changed to red/blue if the relative vector changed.
But then, while they say 3d, I only see a 2d image, so I don't know if they've actually mapped out positions in 3d space or just merely color coded the redshift. If that took ten years, I guess we'll have to wait for quantum computers to do all of the heavy lifting automagically.
Hell he almost has me convinced as well.
IMHO, it's always the user's fault, to a certain extent, if only because they chose an inept OS security wise. Or perhaps they didn't want to deal with the hassle of a "locked down" system. But that extent only extends past where the assholes who wrote the malware in the first place responsibilities end.
It's all a matter of convenience, but for me, security is king, for without that it isn't worth the risk to begin with.Mostly because we don't live in an ideal world. But with OS's like Windows wanting to hold users hands and set them up with bad user practices right out of the box just so they make another nickel, we've come along way in reinforcing that we don't really need to get serious about security. And that, is very sad.
If texting while driving is like driving drunk, then running windows is worse that either as far as "surfing" the net goes. I haven't once got malware in Gnu/LInux, and yet, users EXPECT it in windows to happen some time. I was happy with Windows 7, but I was stupid, I should have known better. My girlfriend still got something on it, and she is one of the more aware users.
If you read the comments to that article, you'd know there's no way Microsoft is responsible for that decision. The regulatory bodies would axe the deal if Microsoft started telling Skype what to do before the deal is approved.
You sir have no idea how the world often really works. Many things are decided by powerful people behind closed doors, and many "powerful" people jump from the big companies to the regulatory bodies and back, getting promotions all the way. They may not have had something to do with it in this case, but do I believe Microsoft has never done anything unethical that would save/make them tons of cash? Wait, what? Almost forgot who we were talking about....
copying is akin to sharing. Stealing is taking something not meant to be shared. It is still copying if I share a movie/song and meant to, i.e. with a friend. If you take it from the publisher's servers and had to crack to get to it, that is stealing.
It is Sony's fault, but it's not the victims fault. I still remember when I moved from small town New Mexico to Cleveland. It wasn't very long before my car was broken into, and it was "my fault" for leaving valuables in it. How is what happened to the victims of Sony's inept security, and victims of criminals who violated said inept security, their fault. That's akin to saying it's the fault of a rape victim for happening to be attractive towards a rapist. I'm not necessarily saying this is what you meant, but there sure are an awful lot of comments eluding that the victim who was stupid enough to use Sony deserves it.
It isn't "wholly" one's fault. However, with a but a few exceptions, we let most of what happens to us happen. If you stored a friend's expensive diamond jewellery (or left a kid and they were kidnapped, etc.) in your car, and it was stolen while you were living in Cleveland, I would bet she'd blame you. I don't live and Cleveland, and I know about Cleveland. No, you didn't and Sony customer's don't deserve it, but they did put themselves out there. Most here are being smug because they do it right now with the next bad boy corporation that will pop up on the radar.
Why can't you live in a world where you can provide details to Sony without worrying about having your identity stolen? Why can't you live in a world where you don't need to lock your car? Why do we need SSH and public key encryption? Why can't you live in a world where you don't have to worry about any crime against property or person? I say it's because we've build a society that is great about protecting the rights of the accused, but does little to protect the rights of the victims. If these guys get caught, the will be afforded every conceivable protection against prejudiced trials... yet there will be no such guarantees for the victims.
Why? Because people are evil in their hearts, that's why. Even under total surveillance people will still try to screw others over fi they think there is a chance to get away with it or they feel it is worth it.
Those rights are to protect the innocents. They are put on trial too, which is the purpose of a trial, or did you forget? I agree we don't protect the rights of the victims. Even the evil people luckily for the most part still see they are better off (for now) with protections of the accused. If we wanted to protect victims, we wouldn't send people to schools for criminals (jail and prison) and instead bring back indentured servitude, for example. But we let those that are evil twist and distort logic to where indentured servitude=slavery.
Mod parent insightful, not troll. He's right, it's not as if we haven't been warned that this info. is has easy transferability, and not securely watched over.
I agree with you quite a bit. However, I have to say that hardly anyone, even you, take security completely serious. It's not as if you never dreamed any of these companies could be "bad". You just don't care and are apathetic in a sense as virtually everyone is, since it is more convenient.
In the end, you can't trust any company. Ok, that isn't correct. I trust everyone. That is what all relationships are based on, even enemies. I trust an enemy will try to screw me over. I trust these companies will sell me out for the sake of their "shareholders", even if I was one.
Oh how much better the world would be if we did business with those self employed and perhaps even small business, instead of corporations. You hear all of the time, it isn't personal, it's just business. Bullshit. All business is personal, and anyone who says otherwise is just trying to shirk their civic responsibilities to their fellow man. Man is man because we work together, not because we can conquer each other. We conquered this earth together, and if we ever stop screwing each other over we can conquer virtually anything.
But we won't. We instead want to listen and laugh at Doomsday predictors. Stay short-sighted and live to excess, living void and unfulfilling, meaningless lives.
Right, translation. "We hate users because we have to work and can't make easy money like the big boys are doing. Even though that is what the users are complaining about. Who cares if people pay for something and we decide they don't get it because it hurts profits. We make more money by screwing over their speeds."
All of these arguments by the cowards are either obvious shills, or brainwashed into being shills. Only designed to confuse and take the discussion off point, we pay, and yet we get screwed. They are the ones doing all of the bitching and whining. We're just bringing up reasonable complaints.
We have your best interests at heart, since you are unable to think for or defend yourselves. We love you and are protecting you... from yourself. And those that might would want to do you harm, like yourself.
It isn't about us, it's about you. Without you, we'd be nothing, and then what would we do? So we just make it impossible as much as we can to have a free, err we mean wrong thought.
This. I've noticed that more and more people publish articles simply it seems to get people distracted and overcomplicating the real issues, often when there aren't any, other than someone wanting a piece of someone else's pie.
Exactly. I'm well aware that it takes money and construction to up the "bandwidth". The coward probably doesn't realise that my point is valid, since he is only looking to make excuses. I mean really, who here thinks that it is automagically added using a slider? What a tool. As if we weren't overpaying already, but then again I don't think he read the last part of my post.
And statistics. Even if it would only affect 2%, that won't be for long. They knew they had to put caps in now, because later it would cause too much backlash. Could it be that the "Internet" could be swamped by digital media? Perhaps, but they could always add more bandwidth. Although then that would hurt their earnings having to invest, much less being able to nickel and dime customers.
I wish companies like All-tel wouldn't have sold out. Though they weren't perfect, they had a lot going on right, and that is why they were successful. On one hand I am glad I am still with them, on the other, the rest of the family was moved to Verizon, eliminating one of the great reasons to join the same network.... But the big boys gobble up anyone that comes close to doing things right, so I don't see any reason to have much hope.
20 computers a month for the trillionth, much less all 60... trillion. A month with 20 computers for one digit still doesn't seem that straight forward.