egrep -v '^#|^$' ldap.conf ?

You're deciding boundaries arbitrarily. For example, who decided all the functions of tr belong in one command? Why are we even comparing userland tools to system functions? Why do you use dd to do EBCDIC-ACSII translation instead of ... the translate command?

How old is SysV init? How has its "Well I assume I started something, JOB'S DONE!" interface with the rest of the system benefitted us all this time? How can you even connect that to something? You can't trust the exit codes from.. well anything, start/stop/or status because too many scripts just return 0. You can't trust status to exist everywhere or even work right. You can't trust a stop to actually kill all processes.

If nobody is going to make init in its current bounds _determinate_, then who really cares if the replacement is more or less modular.

It's not THAT hard.

Let's use Apache as an example.
Typical Apache screw up... user reports site is not responding
apachectl restart says ports are already in use...

apachectl stop
pgrep httpd... see's the old httpd session leader and some friends chilling out. /facetokeyboard
"You stupid P.O.S."
pkill -9 httpd
apachectl start

Many of us have been here, and it's very dumb. A modernized service control system should have a basic two way channel to the daemons.
You stay on the line or get whacked, and while you're alive you deal with all your child process problems and let us know.
What's that specialized tool supposed to do that the service itself cannot? This really simple system lets you know all the shades of gray between "running" and "stopped"

Like:
"starting, but I need to do a consistency check, and this may take a while"
"running, sort of..."
"stopping, well I'm not available anymore, but you can't start me again yet"
"I know enough to stop trying on my own until an operator intervenes"

I read about this sweet new trick in Windows 2000 where you can configure a number of automatic service restart attempts, the interval between them, and an interval in which that count might reset and start over if you want it to.

Honestly, I think the two "sides" here are really the one that has cursory knowledge of the evolution of other operating systems over the past two decades and the side that's basically 90's Linux-Amish.

Linux systems are basically the least unixy "unix-like" systems around. It's a bit late in the game to be a UNIX purist on Linux IMHO. Do what works best.

If America did have a history of being trampled on, we'd be more nationalistic with a bigger military, and a long list of grievances to draw from and thirst for vengeance. I don't think anyone actually wants that.

Most Americans don't know what it's like to live in crime-ridden neighborhoods either, but if we all did, that does't mean our police would be less militarized, smaller, or kids would grow up and do less crime.

A least we are idealists. I know you want to think if we only knew war more personally we'd lose the will to fight, but that's not how it works. If every American soldier had to grow up with insecurity and death around every corner, things would be much worse when the time came to deploy them and that time would still come if you like it or not.

Do you suppose if your kid had his school blown up by some external threat, that would weigh against deciding to take up arms later in life? No.
If you want to show him someone else's blown up school and it makes you feel better, whatever. Thats like taking him past the bad side of town and saying don't join the police because THEY are fucked.

Much more practical: send elected representatives on those trips.

Shut down the congressional cafeterias for a few months out of the year to pay for it, or IDK, tell them there's free hookers and blow in Libya.

So what's the theory for Netflix working fine on my PS4, Wii, Apple TV, iPhone, iPad, iMac, etc.?

Christ, nobody cares that strongly about Linux. I mean... that's why there's no conspiracy to exclude it... I'm sure you love it, but damn.

In an environment where you can be punished for your beliefs, is intelligence really the evil?

It's not the information that's to blame, it's what people do with it, and the worse people are, the less they'll need.
Think of the worst people throughout history, and imagine them making less informed decisions.

McCarthyism, Salem witch trials, Inquisitions

See, the problem wasn't solid information regarding who's a communist, who's a witch, or who's Muslim, the problem was the people punishing you if they thought you smelled like one.

Meh, that page criticizes made up thunder storms in one paragraph then claims SAM operators would not be able to visually identify a plane that day due to the weather.

The small target window... how is that different for any other AA site anywhere? Anyone can look up at a high altitude flight over their home and do simple mental math how much time one would have to operate one of these things. It's not much.

And the tailing fighter jets I was not previously aware of, only increase the odds in my mind that rebels mistook this for a military plane.

There's spin... and then there's Spin. One possibility is... another real possibility is!!! And something else that could have happened is... retired Russian air force colonel says a fighter jet shot it, and then a BUK was ordered to finish it! Look here, at one possible map, from one source! (those are not my words!)

That thing is just conspiracy theory soup... It was accidentally shot down, period. I can speak with as much authority on this matter as random retired colonel somewhere in Russia. Why it's going from, and I'll leave it at SOMEONE, accidentally shooting it down to claims that it was all complexly orchestrated and done on purpose is just bizarre. Hanlon's razor - it was an accident to shoot down a loaded civilian jetliner. PERIOD.

From the perspective of the agency doing the enforcement and helping bring a case to court, what's the difference between this and any other lead that's not directly usable as evidence, such as an anonymous tip? If the evidence is all properly and legally obtained, well I'm not sure this notion of an "illegal" tip is relevant.

Look, I don't know the exact methods used to do parallel construction, but I do see how it can be done legally, and IMO not infringing on your rights. There shouldn't be a distinction between me telling police there's a lot of cars stopping by my neighbors which is WEIRD and me doing the same with positive conformation in my opinion of criminal activity, regardless the particular methods I used to build that confidence. Obviously my confidence is not transitive, and I'd only share what I could, in a manner that protects my ass. The NSA is doing the same I'd imagine, and if you have a problem with THEIR methods, the drug case is not the proper venue to bring it up.

That's not true... The DHS absorbed INS, USCIS, Customs, Border Patrol, Coast Guard, Secret Service, and probably some other notable stuff I'm too lazy to look up. If you need help spotting the theme, it's enforcement.

There may be more collaboration between members of the intelligence community, which DHS is a party to but that's not the reason DHS was created.

You should go review your contract.

"Terrorist" is the wrong word, it's obvious from the intercepts this was a tactical error on someone's part.

Terrorism isn't defined by actions so much as the reason. For the love of Jebus, it has a well understood meaning folks, look it up.

The per the US Constitution part is debatable, nothing you quoted makes it so.

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

I agree with Justice Black, that the Fourth Amendment was not intended to protect your privacy. It was intended to prevent the government from physically intruding on your life. It would have been worded to include eavesdropping if it was meant to be. IMO, if you want privacy protections you need specific laws or new amendments.
If you read the Fourth as some kind of generic privacy protection then how can police interview your neighbors about what they saw or heard happen in your house? It does't make sense. Evidence exclusion rules make more sense for general privacy protection. Laws against gaining knowledge in itself are moronic, in my opinion.

I think most people here would agree the "reasonable expectation" test is fishy.
If you close a phone booth door WARRANT, but open NO WARRANT. Extrapolating from THAT logic lets us say... well you let Google not only index your email but thoroughly analyze them, AND you don't encrypt... soo.....

The Supreme Court did us a favor, but it wasn't the right thing to do. This isn't the privacy protection you want.

... because they're on an island and have to trade with other countries? Non-military intelligence isn't around just to foil movie-like terrrrist plots, but nobody makes movies about the boring stuff.