Biggest rock is best rock!

Frankly, it seems obvious to me...

Not to mention the problem that the airhorn will be much louder in person.

Just wire something into the line, which, at the press of a button, will generate a very loud and high pitched noise. Just remove your own ear from your phone first.

But what tactics would those be? Being nice? Being nice hasn't been working and people are pissed off.

Being informative? Being insightful? Asking questions, promoting discussion? Just about anything that isn't demonizing the people s/he most needs to listen? When presented with a post like that, do you think someone who disagrees, is on the fence, or is disengaged from the topic will think gee, that person is so passionate that they're angrily posting on message boards, I think I'll support them? Or are they more likely to jump to something on the spectrum between 'not caring because the person is repeating the same boring rhetoric that starts flame wars' to being pissed off at the poster and the post? There's a reason s/he was modded Flamebait.

He wasn't out of line.

Never said s/he was. I said s/he was being ineffective. Was that not clear?

You're "correcting" of him was condescending and belittling.

Well, I didn't intend it that way. Reading over it again, I'm not really sure why you're interpreting it that way. Nor why you want to harp on it so much. What do you find condescending about it?

I posted what I meant, plainly and with no hidden meaning. If, for some reason my phrasing made it seem more than what it is, then my apologies to benjfowler.

Not literally telling him to "sit down and shut up" but enough so to be taken that way.

If you say so. I think you're being hypersensitive. And I find it not just a little ironic that you post in the manner you do while decrying others as being condescending or belittling.

Oh, but I forgot - you're justified by being angry.

What are you arguing for, anyway, bmo? To point out that you think I was out of line? You've made that clear, though lacking in the why. To get me to apologize? I will certainly apologize to the person to whom my comment was addressed, if they feel slighted. But it seems more like you want me to recant my opinion, and any notion that this sort of talk is anything less than appropriate or warranted. Sorry, that I will not grant.

>my integrity

Oh fuck off.

Oh, aren't you just precious.

But, enough. Continuing this "discussion" with you is not proving to be worth my time. You clearly have an ax to grind, and while I'm not sure what that has to do with me, you won't be deterred and you won't allow yourself to be questioned, least of all by yourself.

He pre-emptively mentioned that people will tell him to sit down and shut up. Like you. If people like you make people like him sit down and shut up, the rage will simply bottle up and be used ... elsewhere. Eventually. And you won't like it.

The hell?

All I did was to point out that the person's manner in posting will be entirely ineffective and do nothing to help the view they are promoting (and maybe even harm it). I didn't tell them to sit down or shut up or anything of the sort. I didn't pass any judgement on them or their view. Simply pointing out that their time and purpose would be better served if they were to change their tactics.

But you're doing a fabulous job of continuing the same tactics yourself... not to mention polluting the narrative with your personal biases and assumptions which (as yet) have no basis in fact, and cherry-picking and pulling out of context things others have said.

You could have posted civilly and stuck to facts, and separated your speculation and biases from the facts. You didn't. It renders you unpersuasive and makes you look like a loon. And yet somehow, that's justified because you're "angry," and somehow, that's going to make you a victim and it's going to be my fault for telling you to "sit down" and "shut up," despite having said nothing of the sort.

Sorry, but I find your credibility and integrity lacking. Now, by all means, continue using me as a scapegoat and lightening rod for your vitriol. I'll read another reply, but by and large you've lost my audience, and I imagine others' as well.

I agree -- and it has nothing to do with my feelings on religion.

It doesn't matter what it's a translation of, it's a translation.

That said, it's been translated and retranslated many many times over the years, and it's probably a progressive work - I doubt very many are translating from whatever oldest sources are available. My impression was that many different versions were just doing things like modernizing the verses to make them more easily understood or to make choices of the somewhat ambiguous translations based on the winds at the time and the establishment they're being sold to.

Well, that's certainly one way to go about life. Says an awful lot about the people that do that, too.

Huh? The whole point of the GGP's post was that they recognize that there are other statistics services and to point out that those other services also claim that they ignore "Google's inflating tricks" - which, regardless, are not tricks meant to fool stats but to make things faster.

Why is it that you use the same rhetoric that will piss off many of those who would disagree with you (and even some who do), why do you try to insult everyone that you feel would disagree with you? Surely you can't think that's going to help you change their minds. And if not to change their minds, why are you posting?

Yeah, that's pretty much how it works.

That's why I was questioning why you wanted to be [woken] up when another Linux variant runs on [your] phone and doesn't have the same vulnerabilities as Android. The two notions are incongruent. That's why I was asking about specific vulnerabilities, because I wasn't aware of it really being an issue.

And which vulnerabilities are those?

I was under the impression that most Android malware was of the trojan variety. It doesn't exploit any vulnerabilities in Android, it exploits the users' stupidity. Things you download from the market list the permissions. If a wallpaper app wants access to your accounts, SMS, contacts, phone ID, etc., you install it at your peril.

I'm sure there are other vulnerabilities. But as far as I'm aware they are in the minority. Could be wrong.

Huh? Sorry, I don't understand what you're trying to say.

I downloaded the 32-bit version of the CP.

Nope, just verified that what I downloaded the 32-bit version.

I'm guessing ARM sees it as the assimilation of the mobile realm into the traditional "personal computing" market. In that case, ARM has a near monopoly in devices that I wouldn't be shocked far out-volume the traditional desktops and laptops. ARM won't be touching what has traditionally been Intel's market, but it may be influencing it by making it smaller, as people substitute into ARM powered tablets and that kind of thing. ARM really only stands to lose share in what has been it's traditional market (but still may increase its volume as that market is growing rapidly).

This and this make it sound like hardware support is necessary regardless of the virtualization software.

Found nothing conclusive, though.

It's not that VirtualBox requires hardware support. I use it for other things. It's that Windows 8 in VirtualBox requires hardware support. First time I've encountered this.

I'm running Linux on my laptop now, so I don't know how trivial getting VMware or others up and running. Maybe I'll look into it, but I guess I'm wondering if it's somehow related to Win8 and not the host software.