It's also a product of less Linux users running as root. Apply the Windows user mentality to Linux, I bet it would be just as much of a disaster.
Well stated. Conversely, running as a limited user account as a typical Linux user does works wonders with regards to Windows security. Any time a friend or family member approaches me to remove viruses or spyware from their Windows machine, I remove their account from BUILTIN\Administrators and add it to BUILTIN\Users, and they never experience malware problems again (and yes, I do follow up).
Come on! You can't possibly be that stupid, can you?
Do you know anything about McCarthyism?
Senator McCarthy persecuted people due their opposition of his political agenda. In no way am I persecuting the poster, rather I am comically pointing out that his views regarding the economy happen to align with the socialist idea of government domination of trade practices.
The poster actually wants a candidate that will "ban credit cards"! Obviously to ban credit cards would mean banning all forms of lending- mortgages, student loans, small business loans, etc. Can you comprehend the negative effect on the economy such a drastic (and ridiculous) action would have?
From the post I responded to:
They would rather rake the poor over the coals with high interest just because it has a higher return.
Again, apparently the poster simply has no idea what capitalism entails: choice. If someone doesn't want to borrow money at a high interest rate, he or she doesn't have to! Many people survive without high interest rate credit cards- it is a simple matter of living responsibly. Look at Asian immigrants, for example. I personally know several families that have moved to the United States from Asian countries and refuse to even take mortgages to purchase homes. Rather, they live in large groups in affordable housing until they can make their purchases outright without any loans. If they are that rigid with respect to mortgages, I'm quite confident they don't indulge in ridiculous spending via credit cards to create a lifestyle they can't maintain.
Grow up. Stop blaming the government for poor decisions made by the people. It's simple supply and demand- when people stop overindulging and generating massive credit card bills, those high interest rate credit card companies will have no choice but to offer different products.
Show me the candidate that wants to ban credit cards, reduce the terms of patents, or do any structural thing designed to break up the current moneyed class. There isn't one. There's no political party seeking to benefit the American people, merely, a set of dueling soulless juggernaughts, jousting, half drunk with power, over whose lords will crush the masses the most.
Isn't a central doctrine of Christianity the claim that all humans are full of sin, sinners to the core, guilty of sin before even being born, incapable of avoiding sin and in fact requiring sin and being saved in order to taste of the ultimate prize of heaven?
Correct, though what you're missing is the key component: forgiveness from said sins through Jesus Christ. Once one accepts Jesus Christ as his or her savior, that person receives the Holy Spirit. This is a permanent change brought about by God. While it is possible to sin after receiving the Holy Spirit, I don't believe it's possible to have a hateful core.
1 John 2:3-6 (NIV): "We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, 'I know him,' but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did."
So Christians aren't Christian? That doesn't really make sense.
I realize you're trying to be clever, but I'll bite anyway. Just because someone claims something doesn't make it so. I can claim to be a golf pro, yet my performance clearly indicates that I am not (I am truly terrible at golf). Likewise, someone may claim to be Christian, though his actions don't support his claim. Someone who follows the teachings of Christ is a Christian. Someone who attends a Christian church, is a member of the church council, teaches Sunday school, sings in the choir, and hates people, is not a Christian.
the only way you can tell they have religion is their loud harping on evolution and abortion and hatred of homosexuals, atheists, and people who don't share their faith?
No, that's how you determine that someone is a bigot.
You'll know someone is a Christian by his or her compassion, humility, and love. Someone who hates people because of their actions probably doesn't know Jesus very well.
Over time, as man has evolved, he has reduced his need of gods from many (Sun God, God of Love, etc.) down to one - though, not necessarily the same one. The more fully evolved on the planet have made the final step and eliminated that one, too.
What about Hindus? Are they less evolved than Christians and Muslims because they believe in multiple gods*? Are atheists more evolved than isolated tribes in Africa that worship one or more gods?
To state that an atheist is more evolved than a person with faith in one or more supreme beings is absolute nonsense (from a scientific standpoint). How can you explain siblings whose faiths differ (one sibiling with no faith; the other with). How can you explain children with faith whose parents, grandparents, and/or great-grandparents had none? If having religious faith is a negative trait as you suggest, why does the majority of the population still possess this trait?
*Hinduism is a widely-varied faith; to call it entirely polytheistic would be incorrect. Some Hindu sects are monotheistic, some are polytheistic, some are panentheistic, etc. But, nevertheless, many of the approximately one billion Hindus believe in the existence of multiple gods.
Regarding the article summary:
I suppose I'm not surprised by the typical anti-Microsoft slant on Slashdot, but calling something a "last-ditch" effort to "breathe some life back into Silverlight" is merely FUD. The product was only released in November 2007, and development work is already proceeding on the next version.
They're tugging at your pants, "I wanna watch Belle and Beast!" You're trying to skip through FBI warnings and whatnot, they're slowing having a meltdown.
Oh, freakin' come on! Just politely say, "daddy will set up the movie...just hang on." If the temper tantrum continues, they don't watch the movie. I understand your frustration, but we all need to take a step back and reconsider our priorities when we have to watch something IMMEDIATELY and start to experience a "meltdown" when there's a slight delay.
It is a bit irritating to have to sit through warnings that I already know and obey. On the other hand, many other people don't know the laws and the consequences for breaking them. Perhaps they engage in piracy out of ignorance of the law, or perhaps they just are selfish and don't care. In any case, that's the end result of living in a fallen world. Some people simply need to be reminded of the laws and the consequences for breaking them; otherwise they simply won't follow the laws. The same goes for all the DUI and seatbelt commercials on TV- I already know the laws and follow them; many people don't.
It's not like people need 14 months to save up for a digital TV. A 'good enough' off-brand 32" TV runs $700 now, and it'll probably be more like $500 later.
Many people that still receive analog over-the-air broadcasts can't afford a $500 purchase (senior citizens on fixed income, for example). The $40 coupon applied to a $50-$70 converter seems like a more feasible option in those cases.
Comcast's customer service is horrible. I've had to spend hours on the phone getting them to admit to putting a bogus charge on my bill. Not to mention their inane billing practices; I have services that regularly flip from charging me for the previous month of service to the next month of service.
I can provide anecdotal evidence showing Verizon's customer service ineptness. Verizon massively overbilled our church for FiOS service. We had the basic low-end internet service installed free-of-charge (allegedly)- including one free wired connection and a free wireless router. What Verizon ended up doing was (1) sending our bill to the wrong city, (2) charging us for two hookups, (3) charging us for the wireless router, (4) terminating our service due to nonpayment (see number 1), and (5) charging us a $200 early termination fee (see number 4). It was no easy task to have Verizon's extremely poor customer service resolve the issue, either. At the end of the day, we are stuck with a very low-speed connection at an unacceptable price (given the competition), poor customer service, and poor technical support (I was told by a FiOS installer that it was impossible to change the WPA key in a wireless router).
Your statement is incorrect: In the same amount of time post-launch, Vista has sold over 85 million copies as opposed to XP's 45 million. To compare total sales, of course, would not make sense, as XP had a five-year head start.
vista will replace XP just as XP replaced 2K, it will just take a bit of time.
I agree with your assessment, though it's quite interesting that the current sales figures indicates that Vista is being adopted much more rapidly than XP was (85 million sales compared with 45 million sales in the same amount of time after launch). This just about came as a shock to me considering the "Vista is a total flop" slant presented here on Slashdot.
I know this is an insensitive thing to ask, but did your conversion to Christianity closely follow some kind of traumatic event/time in your life? Almost every Christian I've met who did not have strong faith (or had no faith) as a child and converted after they reached adulthood were ex-drug addicts, or survived a horrific accident/disease, ended up in jail and found God, etc.
No such luck, here. I was a typical software engineer. Most people considered me to be a nice guy- I loved my family, treated people with respect, and was a hard worker. I actually considered myself to be too well educated to believe in any supernatural forces, let alone the God of the Bible. I just reached a point where I felt as though something more had to exist. I don't know how this feeling/knowledge came to exist in me, but my faith was literally born out of nothing from my own circumstances.
A person who believes in one religion easily sees the follies of other religions while remaining amazingly ignorant of how sad their own faith seems to unbelievers.
My faith (Christianity) teaches me to love everyone, regardless of their economic status, race, or faith. Because I am completely ignorant as to how someone could regard such teachings as "sad," please educate me.
To me, it feels like you had a part of your brain damaged and turned off when you were a child by your parents before you could protect yourself.
I can't speak for the person to whom you are replying, but I actually didn't believe in God for the first 25 years of my life.
$.99 is just wrong. I have mp3 music on a dvd. At 5MB/song, I can fit 9.6GB/5MB ~=2000 songs. I would be happy to pay $25 for disks like this, but no way I pay alomst $2k for a disk.
Except that 0.000125 cents per song doesn't seem like fair compensation to the artist, does it? And that's ignoring the fact that not 100% of the proceeds may benefit the artist directly anyway. If 100,000 people purchased a 10-song album at your proposed rate, the entire revenue would only be $12,500! Even where I live, that's far below the poverty line. Split that across three or more band members, and they now have barely enough money to eat. And again- that's ignoring the fact that, unless they handle all their management and distribution themselves, the band won't see 100% of the money from the sales. Even if they're dedicated to their craft, at that rate, I wouldn't be surprised if they gave up on creating music altogether to get jobs as beggars.
Pricing can't be entirely dependent upon your storage means and your income. The actual production costs must be factored in as well. Taking that into consideration, I don't see 0.000125 cents per song being a feasible price any time soon.
So tell me again why I shouldn't use the internet to replace that $50 game CD I lost? As a perfect example, I lost my Persona disc for PSX. On EBay, that disc goes for anywhere from $50 to $100. I think I only paid $40 originally, and I don't think I should have to pay that much to replace it. The company won't replace it, as the game is out of print. I'll be damned if I'll just suck it up and accept the loss. That's one of my favorite games of all time.
What a socially irresponsible attitude! What would you do if your $1000 Akita puppy ran away and never returned? Would you simply steal another one? After all, no one would replace him free of charge for you. And don't complain about the analogy, either. You are arguing in favor of stealing something to replace something you lost.
Just bite the bullet and accept that you lost your Persona disc and you can't get another one without paying for it. Then maybe next time you'll be a bit more careful with your possessions (or better yet, you'll simply realize that there are far more important things in life than material possessions).
OTOH, a much bigger worry is this response from the BBC that "iPlayer will be available for Mac" - it's implausible that they haven't heard of Linux, so this is tantamount to a deliberate slap in the face for Linux users. And checking on progress every SIX MONTHS!? What kind of project management it that? The "don't care" kind.
I'm sure they've also heard of many other operating systems, yet they still made the decision to only support the major desktop platforms for the time being. No matter how much of a fanboy you are, you simply can't deny the fact that the plethora of Linux distributions account for a miniscule portion of the desktop market. It's simply a matter of targeting the widest audience possible- first Windows, and next (in a distant second) OS X. I seriously doubt anyone involved wishes any ill will toward any Linux enthusiasts.
The point here is that these plugins are specifically designed to run within Firefox. If Firefox provides no mechanism to prevent these addons from downloading and installing arbitrary content, there most definitely is a serious security flaw in Firefox. What's even scarier is that you don't need elevated permissions for this flaw to be exploited. At least with Internet Explorer, the user must be running as an administrator (which any educated user simply doesn't do) in order to allow any updates to registered COM components. So, even though I run as a limited user, my DOM Inspector plugin for Firefox could potentially insecurely attempt to update itself and end up hosing my profile. Nice.
Take off your tinfoil hat, douche bag. All Windows user go to the same site (one that's not included in the collection of 40,000 monitored sites) to get their patches, so your claim is totally nonsensical.
Slashdot Mirror
Senator McCarthy persecuted people due their opposition of his political agenda. In no way am I persecuting the poster, rather I am comically pointing out that his views regarding the economy happen to align with the socialist idea of government domination of trade practices.
The poster actually wants a candidate that will "ban credit cards"! Obviously to ban credit cards would mean banning all forms of lending- mortgages, student loans, small business loans, etc. Can you comprehend the negative effect on the economy such a drastic (and ridiculous) action would have?
From the post I responded to:
Again, apparently the poster simply has no idea what capitalism entails: choice. If someone doesn't want to borrow money at a high interest rate, he or she doesn't have to! Many people survive without high interest rate credit cards- it is a simple matter of living responsibly. Look at Asian immigrants, for example. I personally know several families that have moved to the United States from Asian countries and refuse to even take mortgages to purchase homes. Rather, they live in large groups in affordable housing until they can make their purchases outright without any loans. If they are that rigid with respect to mortgages, I'm quite confident they don't indulge in ridiculous spending via credit cards to create a lifestyle they can't maintain.
Grow up. Stop blaming the government for poor decisions made by the people. It's simple supply and demand- when people stop overindulging and generating massive credit card bills, those high interest rate credit card companies will have no choice but to offer different products.
1 John 2:3-6 (NIV): "We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands. The man who says, 'I know him,' but does not do what he commands is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But if anyone obeys his word, God's love is truly made complete in him. This is how we know we are in him: Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did."
You'll know someone is a Christian by his or her compassion, humility, and love. Someone who hates people because of their actions probably doesn't know Jesus very well.
To state that an atheist is more evolved than a person with faith in one or more supreme beings is absolute nonsense (from a scientific standpoint). How can you explain siblings whose faiths differ (one sibiling with no faith; the other with). How can you explain children with faith whose parents, grandparents, and/or great-grandparents had none? If having religious faith is a negative trait as you suggest, why does the majority of the population still possess this trait?
*Hinduism is a widely-varied faith; to call it entirely polytheistic would be incorrect. Some Hindu sects are monotheistic, some are polytheistic, some are panentheistic, etc. But, nevertheless, many of the approximately one billion Hindus believe in the existence of multiple gods.
Regarding the article summary:
I suppose I'm not surprised by the typical anti-Microsoft slant on Slashdot, but calling something a "last-ditch" effort to "breathe some life back into Silverlight" is merely FUD. The product was only released in November 2007, and development work is already proceeding on the next version.
Xbox LIVE Service Status: Status: Up and running.
It is a bit irritating to have to sit through warnings that I already know and obey. On the other hand, many other people don't know the laws and the consequences for breaking them. Perhaps they engage in piracy out of ignorance of the law, or perhaps they just are selfish and don't care. In any case, that's the end result of living in a fallen world. Some people simply need to be reminded of the laws and the consequences for breaking them; otherwise they simply won't follow the laws. The same goes for all the DUI and seatbelt commercials on TV- I already know the laws and follow them; many people don't.
Amazing- our experience with Verizon was nearly identical. It's nice to know that they're consistent!
Except that 0.000125 cents per song doesn't seem like fair compensation to the artist, does it? And that's ignoring the fact that not 100% of the proceeds may benefit the artist directly anyway. If 100,000 people purchased a 10-song album at your proposed rate, the entire revenue would only be $12,500! Even where I live, that's far below the poverty line. Split that across three or more band members, and they now have barely enough money to eat. And again- that's ignoring the fact that, unless they handle all their management and distribution themselves, the band won't see 100% of the money from the sales. Even if they're dedicated to their craft, at that rate, I wouldn't be surprised if they gave up on creating music altogether to get jobs as beggars.
Pricing can't be entirely dependent upon your storage means and your income. The actual production costs must be factored in as well. Taking that into consideration, I don't see 0.000125 cents per song being a feasible price any time soon.
Just bite the bullet and accept that you lost your Persona disc and you can't get another one without paying for it. Then maybe next time you'll be a bit more careful with your possessions (or better yet, you'll simply realize that there are far more important things in life than material possessions).
The point here is that these plugins are specifically designed to run within Firefox. If Firefox provides no mechanism to prevent these addons from downloading and installing arbitrary content, there most definitely is a serious security flaw in Firefox. What's even scarier is that you don't need elevated permissions for this flaw to be exploited. At least with Internet Explorer, the user must be running as an administrator (which any educated user simply doesn't do) in order to allow any updates to registered COM components. So, even though I run as a limited user, my DOM Inspector plugin for Firefox could potentially insecurely attempt to update itself and end up hosing my profile. Nice.
Women
Take off your tinfoil hat, douche bag. All Windows user go to the same site (one that's not included in the collection of 40,000 monitored sites) to get their patches, so your claim is totally nonsensical.