I think they're trying to frack with you.

But they don't allow for the possibility that the phenomena they're rejecting might simply be avoiding them because it's offended by them.

Seems like the insecurities of a human rather than some god. Who made who out of whose image?

It's a pity that I completely uninstalled Opera some months ago, after waiting several months with vague promises and excuses about a coming release. It was mostly a secondary browser for me, so I didn't lose much sleep purging it. It also has lost a lot of the features that enticed me in the first place.

Now that it's finally here, I'm not sure I can muster up the effort to install it. Maybe I'll wait a year... or maybe longer.

But then if the authorities didn't listen to him and his kind, then they'd soon find that they'd have to listen to some other scarier people with growing support. Damage limitation, etc.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO *intake of breath* OOOooooooooo...ooo...oo..o.o...! *cough* *splutter*

"I would say 99 percent of teachers see the benefit of it,"

Not damning the point that the Supt. of Holyoke Public Schools made or supporting it, but I tend to distrust anyone who claims that 99% of a group supports their side to bolster their argument. I know, figure of speech, but still indicative... at least 99% of the time.

It wouldn't last. That worked for a while for drug testing, too, until people realized what a farcical damage to society it is.

Well, let's hope that society remains as vigilant.

It might be fine for Japanese culture... I don't know. But it sure as hell wouldn't fly here. As soon as I found out those were required I'd be out the door.

The problem is that there is always some desperate person willing to take your place, either out of apathy or economic necessity. Eventually, if enough of these people fill in the vacancies, then you'll find this sort of thing spreading to other workplaces, again chasing you out. It'll spread if it's allowed to. Still, there's always collective action to avoid this kind of thing. Pity that such defensive action is sort of frowned upon today, though.

Yeah, I had it installed on my machines for thirteen years, if not as my primary browser than as a secondary. Only about a month ago I uninstalled it, fed up with the evasiveness and long delay for the promised Linux version. There's only so long that I'll take being fobbed off with being told to wait, particularly for a browser now based on an engine that's already ported to Linux. What was also galling was the evasiveness by those running the dev blog and forum about when it'll turn up. Now, even if it does turn up, I'll probably just ignore it; why bother when you can install Chromium and get the same experience? From what I can see, it seems to be totally emasculated, with very little of what made Opera special. Ah well, life goes on...

"Do you have any weaknesses?" "Kryptonite."

In that case, you might want to add an inability to correctly put on underwear.

Looks like we need a new idiom to replace "a fish out of water".

Not quite. Root access means a compromised single host. Access to a list of WiFi passwords means compromising all the WiFi networks the machine in question has been given access to, so you'd still want that encrypted.

Sure, but if you're root, then you can quite easily decrypt to find those passwords. This isn't to say that it shouldn't be encrypted (another hurdle, etc), but once you're root, then anything on that machine is fair game, including those WiFi passwords if you're determined enough.

Just to make it clear, my argument isn't really that it's wrong to treat this insect in that way (I'd have problems with it if it was done for kicks, etc, but I can see the educational and experimental benefits if done solely for those purposes), but I do think that the question asked ("You don't see a difference between killing it and doing this?") is a valid question, one that we should always be asking wherever you stand on whether it's right or wrong to deny self-control to another being for our own benefit (I can see good reasons why it's acceptable, but with reservations). I just don't see why it's a troll post as indicated. Seems like a unjustified use of moderation for what's a fair question of ethics.

Why's this post considered a troll? Seems a valid question to ask, even if one is fine with doing this to a roach. Personally, I can see some validity in doing this within reason, but I do think that the issue shouldn't be taken lightly. So, to me, the question above is well worth asking. Mind you, I have bad karma, so maybe it's natural that I missed the point of the score. ;)

All nice and good, till the sun sets.