As an atheist who also happens to believe we are in fact living in a simulation, let me be the first reply to say - that is an excellent point!

The mind that created the universe simulation would perfectly fit the literal definition of God, and I suppose in that sense I'm not truly an atheist either, since such a mind would be a strong likelihood given the assumptions we are already making are true.

But then thinking a moment and recalling what we currently know of our observable universe, with all of the matter and energy out there that must be kept track of in such a simulation, it's fair to also think that us teeny tiny human energy structures are /nothing/ compared to that, and barely nothing in the grand scheme.

Any such mind that is able to simulate all of this wouldn't have any reason to care about me personally, any more than you care about the fate of a single specific atom in your body.
There would be no reason to lay praise or prayer upon such a mind, nor any reason to expect any special treatment over any other equally small structure that is another human.

That still tells me that even if I am factually wrong about the existence of such a God, my behavior and actions in this life so far are still perfectly aligned with how I have behaved and acted. No harm done :}

Actually it does, frighteningly well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...

You are quite correct however, this is a painfully ridiculous situation with the input handlers in Linux.
Multiseat and multihead seems so perfectly fitting as something Linux should be doing, but it fails miserably from the start due to the input handlers.

The real kick in the teeth bit about the Windows solution? You have to pay a full OS license for each seat/head configured!
If your goals are anything more complex than "I just wanted to see if it would work" then this licensing detail makes Windows pretty much the worst OS for such a use case, despite being the only OS that handles it correctly at the input layer.

Where I work a good number of the surface mount assembly lines are run by windows 2000 and XP.
The screen printers still run DOS. Many of the electrical testers and chip programmer rigs need XP or lower as well.

As most of these setups require custom PCI IO cards, visualization isn't an option either.
(Though I am happy to have found an ISA to USB adapter that works well under visualization)

When "a pc upgrade" involves replacing a quarter million dollars in hardware and finding the time to eat the cost of downtime over three running shifts, even I couldn't justify the cost of doing so just to get a newer OS (that will still be windows and still go EOL at some future point!)

My solution is to segment older OSes on the network. They can reach the SQL server and occasionally the file server as needed.
NO email, NO internet, NO intranet, no random transfers between there and other networks.

Everyone has Win7 desktops for office, outlook, and firefox. There is no need to even treat the XP systems as computers anymore. They are now appliances.

With the SMT line PCs not even showing a desktop or letting the operators exit the controller GUI, and the test hardware being locked to a list of approved executables (More for QA actually), the likelyhood of an infection requiring a reinstall is next to nill.

That leaves hardware failures. I have full drive images to restore once the HDs fail. On a more serious failure, the entire rig is considered failed. Either time to pony up the $25k for a new system, or we do without.

As long as you get your desktops upgraded, there is a lot less you need to use XP for, and most attack vectors can actually be completely blocked without effecting any work flow what so ever.

He has every right to complain, a lot more than you or I.

He has been put in prison for a crime that even the US government does not believe is a crime, proven by the fact they SHOW it is OK to do this to other people.

If it is acceptable for this action to be done at all, then clearly Weev has done nothing at all wrong here and shouldn't be in prison in the first place.

You don't get to claim "this person should be punished for doing X to be" and then turn around and expect to be treated differently when you do X to other people.

I know you are just trolling, but in case anyone considers that you might sound like you know what you're taking about...

No, actually "you" can't. Our ERP system that runs the company cost around 2.5 million all said and done, and it only runs on Windows.
For our industry, there are only three (3!) such ERP packages in existance, ALL of which require windows to run (Except Oracles product, which can use windows and/or work poorly in non-IE browsers, but better than nothing if you can afford them)

Do YOU plan on cutting me a check to have this non-existant software created and paid for?
No? Hello? I hear crickets from you now.

Every solution you suggest would literally be no different than tossing out every computer and going back to pen and paper. You might as well suggest that a raw pork chop is a far superior weapon to a gun when the stated goal is to kill someone - obviously stupid and incorrect.

Except for that little fact that there is no software to use. Yea, I kinda think our users will notice that tasks previously taking 60 seconds now take 4-8 hours to complete.

Considering that advice would make the stock holders lose billions and no longer have a business, thanking me would not be on their list of methods to extract revenge and pain out of me.

As a troll I realize you only have the goals of causing pain and misery in others lives, but most of us actually don't enjoy seeing that.

I hate Microsoft garbage as much as the next person, most likely more since I actually use the crap and you clearly admit you don't and thus have no experience about the claims you also made.

The fact of the matter is that no matter how poorly microsoft software works, that poor solution is surrounded on all sides by non-solutions that don't even function. There is nothing better.

But if you truly believe your other solutions will work as drop-in replacements, will earn companies so much more money, and get you placed on a kingly pedestal showered in thanks - just put your money where your mouth is.
Once you pay all the change costs, and take on the risk your suggestions will incur, I will jump at the chance to rid ourselves of microsoft faster than you could sing trololol.

I'm just waiting on that check still...

1000 years of subjective time is more than suitable to plan and plot any revenge against the ones that put you through that...

"In his house at R'lyeh, dead Cthulu waits dreaming"

If you make it OK to use drugs and torture against criminal and innocent people (both of which get processed through "corrections", then at the same time you are stating that drugging others against their will and torturing them is not a bad thing to do (else you wouldn't do it)

If those are OK to do now, just imagine how many torturers you just handed releases to, since you want the horrible act they are in prison for to no longer be a crime that is against the law.

I would much prefer people so far gone they are willing to torture others continue to be imprisoned instead of legalizing torture and no longer arresting such people.

I've been asking that same question, but I think Viacom blocked my email addresses by now :{

Gnote doesn't appear to handle images and other binary data, just text.

CherryTree looks pretty close however. The only feature I see lacking is its search.
OneNote can text-search within images for example, not just the textual notes.

The Outlook integration is pretty nice too, but since that won't be in the free version it looks like, that isn't fair to compare.

Why would you think that?

Especially so after I explicitly stated they do pay taxes and would choose to do so given the choice...

Is your argument that the government does not deserve those taxes and they shouldn't be paid, thus the solution is to pay your taxes? Because that makes even less sense!

Strawman, since no one has claimed otherwise.

We detect the activity around and affected by the blackhole, which is not at all inside of it by any definition.

As others have mentioned, it may not be single use after all...
But even assuming it was, once the economic weapon has been used, doesn't that still leave conventional warfare and the ICBMs that weren't used?

Assuming the heirs in question weren't butchered by a mob along with their billionaire parents and the entire estate burnt down... Yes, the government earned it.

These heirs wouldn't have ANY money, nor their parents, if it wasn't for the government. If they had anything of value, they would likely have been killed and the valuables stolen if not for the government.

Not to mention they probably would have died during birth if not for the hospitals and medicine made possible by a stable economy, roads to get them to said hospital, and police to protect their safety and possessions.

If they want to claim they owe the government nothing, they also lose the right to complain when the rest of us murder them and take their stuff. I seriously doubt they really would go with that option if given the choice.

Either defend yourself 100%, or stop complaining and pay up for the protection offered.

That can be a risk yes, but is easily defeated.

If the files I upload are intended to be distributed and shared, say software I write or videos I publish or whatnot, then that profiling is only a good thing since I want to rise in the search results as the source and creator.

If the files are a backup of personal/company data, stuff not to be shared anyway, I'll be uploading an encrypted container.
Yes, my profile will have a single entry stating I use encryption (which I don't know how to avoid) but my actual data isn't profiled since they can't read it.

True, that is always a risk when you go 3rd party and don't do it "in house".

But that shouldn't be TOO much of a problem, especially for the backup situation. By definition backups are a copy, and by best practices you shouldn't ever have only one copy but many. Losing one may be an inconvenience in replacing it, but only a fool would delete their originals after uploading a backup.
(Not to say there aren't fools out there who do exactly that - only to say this is the fools fault, not the hosting provider)

For the distribution situation, it is adamantly a much larger inconvenience and to many more people.
Hopefully a person operating this way has their own domain name and website, and can be the authoritative source for where to download the files.
Then it's just time being spent to upload everything to a new host to distribute and updating the links that point to them.

Yes users wanting to download will be upset, but that's mainly a result of you not having redundancy in place.
I realize redundancy isn't always an option for many reasons, and am not attempting to place blame. (If you can't afford it, you can't afford it.)
But this is the case with most everything online, be it file hosting, web hosting, backup services, ISPs/uplinks using BGP vs a single DSL/cable provider, etc.
I don't see that as a fault with the 3rd party really, just an unfortunate truth to the nature of what we do.

Agreed! No one is perfect, and expecting otherwise can only bite you.
But for most, especially individuals and hobbyists but small companies too, Google or Amazons (or even Microsofts) admins are going to have more time and people on hand to take care of it.

It's always a cost/benefit to figure out.

Perhaps. I think this one is going to boil down to personal preference.
There is a certain extent I do trust Google, and a line I wouldn't trust them past. I suspect my line is a bit closer to "trust" than your line is ;}

But assuming we are both knowledgeable about what Google does, what their business modal is, and what specific thing we will be using them for - I don't think there is much either of us can say to move that line for the other much, and that doesn't make either of us wrong.

According to the statements made which my comment replied to, no actually you can't.

Parent specifically said the solution was one single 4 TB hard drive.
You can't do a RAID with one disk.
You can have multiple copies on that one disk, but that won't help against most failure modes.

Parent specifically argued against all the options that would let you protect a single consumer drive from failure, and didn't even account for other failures such as bitrot checksums, parity to fix said bitrot, or user error (ie deleting something on accident)

Strongly agreed there too.

Personally I do not backup any of my movies. I keep my original DVDs and whatnot, and yes it would suck to re-rip everything and sort it nicely again, but it can be done.
My music ended up backed up due to wanting it at multiple locations, but I didn't intend on that originally.
My vacation photo situation sounds identical to yours too. If 5 US states disappear over night including the one I live in, fallout has taught me photos will not be of help in fighting off the raiders and mutants ;P

But - I do have a ~250 MB encrypted volume I DO backup everywhere I can.
It contains my tax paper work, scans of important documents I need to keep for some time, my own unencrypted private certificate authority cert, etc.

I also have a smaller encrypted volume I store with family and friends that contains my password basis and schemes, plus some of the more important ones along with my rotation schedule and whatnot.
My will contains this volumes password and a list of which family members and friends have a copy, intended to be available to my heir once I pass on.
The more help for her in this case the better, since I won't be around to ask!

While these days I run a fleet of my own servers to host files I distribute, I too started out with free hosting online (zomg ftp.netcom.com and geocities!) then moved up to paid hosting (usually of the web hosting form) before finally moving to colo servers and now adding VPSes.

Professionally on the other hand, I do have a metric crapton of data that does need to be backed up. I have ~250 employees here I have to protect against themselves (Be it a boot drive image to be restored after an infection, or files on the storage server to be placed back after being overwritten incorrectly)

But I will fully admit at work I keep everything in-house. They provide much more funds for that than I am willing to spend for myself at home, so thankfully this isn't an issue ;}

In the end it all boils down to the specific case at hand, what concerns one has, and which options are easiest to address those concerns.

But none of that was mentioned in my previous reply, since that was on a pure technical level between a single consumer drive on one PC, and enterprise grade hardware setup by best practices, administrated by competent people.
Hopefully it is clear however that even the political side of the argument isn't as black and white either.

And a 74 GB SAS drive is $300, which won't fall over and puke on itself the second a second user tries to perform a read operation on it, nor will die in zero to a few years.
That is only $4 per GB, and provides significantly higher speeds, bandwidth, and lifetime over your option.

Not to mention, I would rather pay Google $0.02 per GB for the service of "storing my data", compared to paying you anything for the service of "oops, all your data was lost because this crappy consumer level drive failed"