Never mind software vulnerabilities or theoretical IM programs, what about all the existing file sharing programs? We have to prosecute those evil criminals that promote music piracy. We must find whomever is responsible for such piracy systems as FTP, HTTP, and even IP.
Maybe I suck at English too, but I don't see anything wrong with that sentence. I seem to remember that British English abbreviates "mathematics" to "maths", whereas American English abbreviates it to "math".
I worked for a little while for a company that runs wireless access points at places like coffee shops, motels, and car dealerships. I'd guess about half of them were free, the other half were around $3 per hour, $6 per day, or $10-$12 per month (I think one or two expensive hotels charged $20 per month). They pretty much treated me like crap, though, so I wouldn't mind seeing them get completely run out of business by services like Time Warner's.
The first vehicles were made to last longer, vehicles today have maybe a tenth of the lifespan
If that were true, and considering that my car is now 7 years old, my mother's car is 10 years old, and my sister-in-law's car is 14 years old, shouldn't those first vehicles still be on the road today? After all, they do have a lifespan of 100-150 years.
There's a rather significant difference between something being unnecessary and being necessary only in small quantities. Needing 10g of carbohydrates certainly doesn't make carbohydrates unnecessary. You also eventually reach the point where you don't want to lose any more weight.
If I am mistaken, please enlighten me and show me exactly where explicit violence targeting women (i.e. beating, raping, torture, etc) is promoted in The Bible.
Please enlighten me and show me exactly where the parent post said anything about the Bible promoting violence targeting women. The post only said that it contains descriptions of violence targeting women. A broad interpretation of a poorly worded law could mean that such parts of the Bible would be illegal on the Internet.
Apparently I didn't mention that I'm actually downloading Kubuntu. Oops. Anyway, I just checked my download again a few minutes ago, and it was up to 125 KB/sec. I won't be putting together the computer that I'm installing it on until this weekend, so whether the download takes 8 hours or 16 hours doesn't matter much to me, and I like the warm and fuzzy feeling knowing that I haven't contributed as much to the meltdown of their servers.
I hope people start using the torrents to download the DVD images as well. I found the torrent earlier this morning (about 3-4 hours ago), and I was peaking at 2 KB/sec with 4 peers. Checked on it a little while ago, and I'm up to 25 KB/sec. C'mon people, I need my fix.
It's pretty weak to say "it came from this IP address" equates to "it was more likely than not it was him!"
If the ISP provides records showing that the IP address was assigned to that person at the time in question, then it isn't weak at all. If the person can actually prove that his access point is open to everyone and that there is no trace of infringing files on his computer, then he has fairly strong evidence in his favor. If he can't prove those facts, the aforementioned ISP records would probably be the strongest evidence in the case and determine the outcome.
"Programming is to Computer Science as telescopes are to Astronomy"
I agree that computer science (even software engineering) is about much more than programming, but how many astronomers don't know how to use a telescope? Programming is a tool (or I suppose more accurately a collection of tools) that a computer scientist uses to achieve their goal. Computer science isn't just about the tools, but the better computer scientists will be proficient in a larger set of tools.
For you to have any point whatsoever, you would similarly have to make the counter assumption to every line of your ticklist. The trouble is that your counter assumptions are only valid if you make a whole series of assumptions as to what I think a "pro-gun" world would look like.
I believe the point is that there's no way, short of being omniscient, what the death toll would have been if other people in the rooms were carrying guns. Maybe the shooter would have been taken out after he fired twice. Maybe 40 people would have been killed in the crossfire. The point is how pointless it is to assume what would have happened if the situation would have been different.
If you were in that room, and this killer was shooting at you, would you have rather have had a gun and the training required to use it correctly, or not?
Since I wouldn't be wearing body armor 24/7, I'd probably be dead. It wouldn't really matter what I would rather have had.
It still doesn't change the fact that this guy's spree would have ended if one guy had a gun (and had been trained) for self defense.
And exactly what sort of omniscient being are you? As many other people of said, what happens when the whole situation turns into a chaotic firefight because 50 students have guns? For that matter, what would happen in your "factual" scenario if the one guy with a gun was the first one killed?
If this had been the most controversial thing he had ever said, that might make sense, but from what I've heard, this was nothing compared to some stuff he's said in the past. So why would the advertisers suddenly decide not to sponsor someone that they've known for years is controversial?
I realize they didn't personally can him, but their over reacting playing the victim role was a major contributor to the old crackers demise.
I don't think they wanted to play the "victim role". I think the media wanted them to act like victims of a horrendous crime, and they certainly couldn't come on television and say "Eh, his remarks weren't that bad." I'm sure they would be annoyed by the insult (assuming they would even hear about it if it weren't for the media frenzy), but I would question whether or not they really wanted to be the center of a media shitstorm.
Imus's firings represent the decision of Imus's employers and their advertisers, nothing more. It was an economic decision, not a moral one.
It may have been an economic decision by his employers, but how is it an economic decision by the advertisers? Did they really think the show would lose that many listeners/viewers? I've never listened to his show, but from what I've heard, this was far from the most offensive thing he's ever said. If people were still listening to his show when he said it, were they going to stop listening because of that one comment?
I think the point is that "regular" people weren't offended by what was said, but that a politically motivated organization turned it into such a media feeding frenzy that Imus got fired (whether it's because his bosses felt obligated to fire him or because the advertisers felt obligated to remove their support). The wasn't any significant amount of genuine outrage at what he said, there were only people that thought that they should be outraged, or else they'd be labeled as racists.
Slashdot Mirror
Never mind software vulnerabilities or theoretical IM programs, what about all the existing file sharing programs? We have to prosecute those evil criminals that promote music piracy. We must find whomever is responsible for such piracy systems as FTP, HTTP, and even IP.
I worked for a little while for a company that runs wireless access points at places like coffee shops, motels, and car dealerships. I'd guess about half of them were free, the other half were around $3 per hour, $6 per day, or $10-$12 per month (I think one or two expensive hotels charged $20 per month). They pretty much treated me like crap, though, so I wouldn't mind seeing them get completely run out of business by services like Time Warner's.
How tired do you have to be to not notice that you tripped over a bunch of cables?
There's a rather significant difference between something being unnecessary and being necessary only in small quantities. Needing 10g of carbohydrates certainly doesn't make carbohydrates unnecessary. You also eventually reach the point where you don't want to lose any more weight.
2) I think you'll find a lot more silver and gold coming out of mines than steel.
I'm sure there's a good Cone of Silence joke somewhere in there too, but I can't come up with it.
Apparently I didn't mention that I'm actually downloading Kubuntu. Oops. Anyway, I just checked my download again a few minutes ago, and it was up to 125 KB/sec. I won't be putting together the computer that I'm installing it on until this weekend, so whether the download takes 8 hours or 16 hours doesn't matter much to me, and I like the warm and fuzzy feeling knowing that I haven't contributed as much to the meltdown of their servers.
I hope people start using the torrents to download the DVD images as well. I found the torrent earlier this morning (about 3-4 hours ago), and I was peaking at 2 KB/sec with 4 peers. Checked on it a little while ago, and I'm up to 25 KB/sec. C'mon people, I need my fix.
Well, if you wanted to be really pedantic, not all of them were states. For example, Massachusetts is officially called a commonwealth.
I'm not a Constitutional scholar or anything, but you might want to check the last part of that sentence.
Insert joke about your package here.
If you have an Internet connection with unlimited bandwidth, please share the technology with the rest of the world.
You forgot that the only people that use open source software like Firefox are hippies and communists.
If this had been the most controversial thing he had ever said, that might make sense, but from what I've heard, this was nothing compared to some stuff he's said in the past. So why would the advertisers suddenly decide not to sponsor someone that they've known for years is controversial?
You mean your standards for a radio talk show host are higher than your standards for rappers? You don't listen to many radio talk shows, do you?
I think the point is that "regular" people weren't offended by what was said, but that a politically motivated organization turned it into such a media feeding frenzy that Imus got fired (whether it's because his bosses felt obligated to fire him or because the advertisers felt obligated to remove their support). The wasn't any significant amount of genuine outrage at what he said, there were only people that thought that they should be outraged, or else they'd be labeled as racists.