Comment Re:Mod this up Re:I guess he crossed the wrong peo (Score 1) 320
Do you think that no science was used in the European countries who all banned GMOs?
Yes, those bans came from fear mongering.
Do you think that no science was used in the European countries who all banned GMOs?
Yes, those bans came from fear mongering.
your irrational fear is nothing but illiteracy and ignorance
I think I have an irrational fear of sentences with no capitol letters in them. It makes me feel that the person authoring them is illiterate and ignorant.
Things DO NOT need to be connected to the internet.
I wonder if that will become the definition of a 'thing' in a generation.
Thing: An item which is connected to the internet.
This is a little bit different than Internet Exploder, which MS was forcing people to keep installed when using the OS. But one could just as easily type www.yahoo.com into the URL, or even www.bing.com into the URL.
But could just as easily launch Netscape from their desktop as they could IE from their desktop.
You couldn't buy a computer (and still can't) without Windows.
But with a computer you could always buy the parts and build your own. Slashdot will regularly feature posts from companies selling non-Windows computers. Just because IE is installed doesn't force you to use it.
A couple of months after Danielle and Alexander Meitiv were found responsible for “unsubstantiated neglect” for letting Rafi, 10, and Dvora, 6, walk home from a park close to where they live in downtown Silver Spring, they gave the children permission to do it again. Responding to a call from a citizen, police collected the children and took them to CPS in Montgomery where, 5 1/2 anxious hours later, they were reunited with their parents.
Manages to insert the government even more in the internet.
Given that we all first started receiving the internet over telephone lines which were subject to Title II, how does saying "Even though you're no longer connecting via a telephone line, you still have to follow Title II" insert even more government to the internet. It's keeping the same amount of government in our internet.
Why have innovation and free markets when we can have government regulations?
If you've ever read 'On the Wealth of Nations' (the book that kind of defined free markets), you'll notice how most of the book is laying out the required government regulations needed to create a free market. The two aren't mutually exclusive. A free market depends upon government regulations which prevent incumbent players from destroying the free market.
Of course there are government regulations which also cripple free markets, but don't kid yourself into thinking that the lack of government regulations are a free market. They're not.
IF You want to fix the "Comcast vs Netflix" problem, fix the last mile problem first. IF consumers actually had a choice in providers, beyond Cable vs others, you'd see better customer service.
That would be ideal, but given the reality on the ground, that's not going to happen. The FCC can fix Comcast vs Everyone via Title II, it can't fix every municipal ordinance all across the country.
Why did you have to rent your phone? Because government regulations and laws enforced a monopoly.
No, you had to rent your phone because there was only one telephone utility (AT&T), and that's what their business policy was. Do you think a bunch of telephone companies sprang up with interconnectable systems, and then the government decided to force the companies to only allow company approved hardware on the client side of their systems?
As what I'd consider a 'power user', one of the first things I do is turn that obnoxious thing off.
I remember during the Vista Beta time frame visiting a website that I'd never been to before and all of a sudden having the browser cause a UAC prompt. Now you can go off on what sort of insecure hole could exist that would allow a website to make admin level privileges on a computer, but that doesn't matter; what matters is that fact that it could. I clicked 'No' on the prompt and felt a sudden rush of power over my computer that I hadn't had before. Previously random crap from anywhere could make admin level changes to my computer, and before UAC I'd have no\little idea about it. But with UAC I was in control now.
It happened a few more times too. I was doing something that shouldn't have required admin privileges, got a prompt and denied the poorly written program the access it was trying to usurp.
As a power user, I'm sure you're aware that it's a really bad idea to do your day to day computing logged in as a user with administrative permissions. So with UAC turned off you must have some system setup where you download your installers, and then switch users to the admin to actually install them. Sounds like too much work to me.
Turning off UAC is like have a setting that will click 'yes' to every prompt. An idiot would click 'yes' to every prompt. A power user knows when to click 'no'.
From my experience dealing with Microsoft Exchange administrators, this comes as no surprise.
However, when people running high-performance, FOSS mailservers forget to get fresh certs before the old ones expire they are ridiculed and many even lose their jobs. There's a higher level of competence expected, I guess.
You're right, it totally sucks to have software that seems to be able to perform, without a crack team of competent professionals holding it together each day. All software should require massive amounts of 'competence' to manage it, instead of being able to just do what the user wanted it to do.
Just put two reasonably competent people in the cockpit
That's the real trick, ain't it. You can't guarantee that statement.
"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra
