So far the record in NATO member countries for the military obeying the dictates of the elected government has been exemplary.
if you want to call four military coups in Turkey since they joined NATO exemplary... ^^
In Old High German "gift" meant "that which has been given", very similar but slightly more neutral to the English gift; in modern German you can still see traces of that in "Mitgift" = dowry.
The modern meaning goes back to the word being used as an euphemism for poison ("the deathly gift") and that meaning becoming dominant over time. As the meaning changed the word also changed its genus from female "die Gift" (still "die Mitgift") over male to the neuter ("das Gift").
"Die Gift" = donation/present was still used (albeit archaic) when "das Gift" = poison was already established.
t. Unless your idea of "most of Europe" is one that doesn't include, France, Germany, Greece, the U.K., Italy, and I'm sure others that I don't feel like chasing down
Sadly, you're wrong. France? Check. Germany? Check.
How about you check your facts because gloating over others not checking theirs?
There is no same-sex marriage in Germany. Gay couples can enter a registered domestic partnership which is treated the same as marriage with regard to some issues (inheritance, social issues, pensions,
Most notably registered domestic partnerships are not intended to receive the same tax benefits as married couples (a couple of court judgements turned this over last year but the current government is already working to revise relevant law to circumvent the criticism) and cannot adopt children as a couple (one of them can of course adopt the child as an individual but in that case his/her partner is not legally considered a parent).
Registered partnerships are also not explicitly protected by the Grundgesetz (German constitution) the way marriage is (6.1 "Marriage and the family shall enjoy the special protection of the state.").
Some Chinese technical professionals can bypass it with a variety of methods and/or tools.
I've met quite a few Chinese in online games and what they tell is that circumventing the firewall is as easy as using a proxy or VPN, is basically risk-free (to the end-user) and is really nothing special amongst their peer-group (age 15-30, educated, typically upper middle class). Every now and then their preferred proxy or VPN provider gets blocked and they have to look for a new one but that's a minor hassle and not a deal-breaker.
So the emphasis when reading the summary should definetely be on the variety of tools that are available to sidestep the firewall, not on the level of technical competence that is required to do so.
There are bits of Chinese medicine that might potentially be real, if they could be standardized, purified and most of all validated. Homeopathy on the other hand, relies purely on the placebo effect. You don't need expensive water for that.
inexpensive water would not be a credible placebo - everybody knows that medicine is expensive.
>Anti-vaccine is not anti-science,
Immunology is a science. If you are anti-vaccine, you have to discount all of immunology as a science. Disclaiming the fact that vaccines work is as bad as disclaiming gravity.
Anti-vaccine, at its core, is anti-science. It is not ad-hominem.
You seem especially butthurt about this.
-- BMO
Despite what you might believe (parts of) Economics are a science, too - and the equation is pretty easy:
Vaccinations have a cost to the individual being vaccinated (such as health risks, effort,
The last part is important - in a world where everyone but one person is vaccinated the benefit of that person receiving a vaccination, too, would be absolutely negligible (as the disease would - in the absence of other carriers such as animals - be extinct) and for that individual the cost of getting a vaccination would almost certainly outweigh the benefits.
In a society where the vast majority of the population is vaccinated each individual would be better off getting no vaccination (as the risk of contracting the disease becomes much lower than the risk of side-effects from the vaccination). The anti-vaccine crowd is just doing what is individually rational for them.
The problem is of course that if more than a handful of people do what is rational for them, the majority of the population will soon no longer be vaccinated and the risk of disease will soon start to eclipse the risk of side-effects (making vaccination the individually rational choice).
Maybe you don't like this fluctuation, maybe you would like to extinguish the disease altogether (which would require you to maintain very high vaccination rates for a long time) - in that case the government has to step in and make vaccinations compulsory (with the knowledge that this solution may be for the greater good but is not pareto optimal as some will be affected by unnecessary side effects).
Last I checked (admittedly, over a year ago), EVE ran great in Wine. They actually had a Linux client for a while, and eventually discontinued it because it was easier to just provide people info on how to run it in Wine, and the end result was better performance and graphics.
EVE via WINE is an acceptable option if you can live with EVE being broken for a few days after major updates, without having reliable test server access and with significantly reduced performance compared to the Windows version (I regularly run 3-4 clients on Windows I got barely 2 to run on Linux at acceptable framerates and that was with heavily reduced settings).
The ecosystem of 3rd party apps for EVE has become slightly more cross-platform friendly during the past few years (more
Most alliances use Mumble or TS3 nowadays but some smaller corporations still use Ventrilo (which doesn't have an official Linux client).
So you do not feel that up to 200 unguided rockets a day for a couple of weeks into your county is reason enough for a retaliatory operation?
I think that the primary reason for this "retaliatory operation" is not to make the Palestinians stop shooting rockets (they won't) but chestbeating ("we can't stop you from violating our sovereignty but at least we can look tough while you do it") - and that with the situation on the border to Syria and the upcoming elections the IDF & Netanjahu both feel a profound need for that.
Turkey is openly providing safe harbor to Syrian rebels while at the same time telling Assad that if he doesn't stay well clear of their border, they have no problems whatsoever to call down the wrath of the entire NATO on his regime. Meanwhile Isreal is making excuses for Assad after his troops shot at Israeli territory (and Israeli soldiers!).
Isreal probably has good reasons to act as they do (maybe they have better intelligence on the havoc Assad could wreak if he panics) but that doesn't change that they started to look weak - which is an impression they cannot afford given their situation.
And who would elect some who can't even keep his own people safe?
You notice that the rocket attacks on Israel increased as the chances of Assad winning in Syria decreased. Almost like someone wanted to get Syria off the front page.
You could argue just as well that after showing unusual lenience towards Syria (there have been several incidents on the Golan Heights during the past few weeks most of which Israel did uncharacteristically excuse - they obviously have no interest whatsoever in a border conflict with the Assad regime right now) the IDF feels the need to demonstrate strength and assertiveness in a less risky theater.
Already being in a heightened state of military awareness (having mobilized reservists etc,
While I don't necessarily disagree with your point rgd the behavior of the Palestinians I think that Isreal is going for a very deliberate over-reaction specifically with an eye towards Syria (and by extension Iran).
In my opinion Israel is very uneasy about the option to start a war with Syria (which would undoubtedly act as a catalyst to the conflict between Assad regime and rebels and might lead to unpredictable developments and outcomes) but can't afford to sit idly by either.
Contrast the behavior of Israel regarding Syrian border violations with the behavior of Turkey rgd the same issue and the probelm becomes imho quite obvious.
*OK, that one may be slightly contentious, but TBH, I've never (and I mean in since kernel 1.0) heard any convincing argument regarding why anyone should run SUSE over another distro. Counter-arguments happily invited.
The best reason to use SUSE (which is also the best reason not to use SUSE) is YaST. It's one of the best configuration tools for new users (iirc only Mandrake/Mandriva had something comparable) but it can lead to horrible breakage if you mix using YaST and manually editing configuration files.
SUSE also used to provide (imho) the best out of the box KDE desktop experience but with the switch to Gnome they let that strength fall by the side entirely...
SUSE also came with very decent manuals (a user guide and an administration guide which rivaled many Linux books in size & scope) but the sale of boxed sets has been scrapped with SUSE Linux 11 as far as I remember (at that point Novell decided to adopt the RH model and only to provide an enterprise distribution). In the German language area it also was the distribution for which 3rd party documentation was the most readily available (e.g. Michael Kofler's excellent "Linux" book used to be quite SUSE centric and even included SUSE Linux evaluation versions at times).
From my point of view SuSE peaked around version 7 where it provided massive advantages over contemporary distributions for non-experts. Today there is very little reason for a home user to use OpenSUSE and SUSE mostly competes with RHEL.
PETA doesn't believe in people period, hell they labeled fish as "sea kittens" to try to get people not to eat them, and I have even seen a PETA person arguing against FLU shots because the flu is "alive".
The Jains would likely agree. Beliefs in the 'sanctity of life', for lack of a better term, typically have a level of life they respect. For a lot of religions, its a fetus. For a lot of PETA followers its animal life. The problem is you usually end up having to defend where you decide to draw the line and there don't seem to be any scientific arguments for a particular view, it comes down to whatever your faith or your gut or your conditioning tells you. Unless you refuse to draw the line...and then you get a virus with a right to life. One way off of a slippery slope is to slide all the way to the bottom. On a toboggan. With bells on.
The problem with giving viruses a "right to life" is that they are not alive in the first place.
Sharp's position is entirely determined by the choices they make or have made. If they make bad decisions, their business will suffer and if they make good ones their business will prosper.
There are external factors such as exchange rates that can hurt a business badly without it making any "wrong" choices.
What makes you think they're going to keep their word? You're not signing a contract here, these are criminals! All you're doing is showing you're a soft touch. They'll be back, and they'll demand more money. They'll probably tell their friends, too. Not to mention the moral aspect that by giving in to these people you are directly funding crime.
OP didn't solve the problem and judging by the summary he doesn't believe to have solved the problem by paying up - but hedid buy time to set up infrastructure so he can actually refuse payment on the next collection round. Even if the OP he does ultimately decide to go with the Rackspace solution his $400 investment has saved him $4500 in hosting fees.
How would you have reacted in his situation? And no, "I would have planned ddos protection when setting up the site several months/years ago" does not count.
The choice is between either paying the $400 in the hope that it will buy you enough time to fix the issue or not to pay and possibly lose out on several days worth of revenue (plus the damage to your reputation - customers don't like companies that provide no or only severely degraded service) while you scramble to find a solution to the on-going ddos.
The submitter might have made a mistake by responding to the demand in the first place - maybe the extortion attempt was not as targeted as he believed it to be and no reaction would not have resulted in a DOS... but that's speculation. Once the DDOS was under way that option was no longer available.
Maybe get off your moral high-ground (not wanting to support crime, never giving in to blackmail out of principle,
2.4 statute miles of surgical tubing at Yale U. = 1 I.V.League
