Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Bingo! (Score 1) 807

by DaveAtFraud (#47762023) Attached to: Choose Your Side On the Linux Divide

... I come down on the systemd side when I want my laptop to correctly connect to the appropriate WiFi network (but only if not connected to a wired network).

The NetworkManager is written by literally the same people who work on the SystemD.

If it hadn't worked before, why you think it would work afterwards?

It works better than the alternative for managing dynamic network connections. That isn't saying much since the alternative is doing it manually or with handcrafted shell scripts.

I usually call it NetworkMangler.

Cheers,
Dave

Comment: Re:NEWS: Law enforcement officers doing actual job (Score 5, Insightful) 92

by philip.paradis (#47755185) Attached to: Early Bitcoin User Interviewed By Federal Officers

If you had any sense, you'd understand that regardless of the reason(s) you've found yourself interacting with the police, the only sensible course of action would be to have all communications handled by your lawyer(s). Don't worry, you're far from alone in your lack of sense, and that is precisely why fairly rudimentary law enforcement pressure (rightly or wrongly) works as often as it does.

Comment: Bingo! (Score 1) 807

by DaveAtFraud (#47754233) Attached to: Choose Your Side On the Linux Divide

I was looking for an appropriate thread to make the same suggestion. I come down on the side of the sysvinit people when it comes to servers and other stable installations. OTH, I come down on the systemd side when I want my laptop to correctly connect to the appropriate WiFi network (but only if not connected to a wired network). It really makes sense to support both. Stability, reliability and simplicity for the server folks and something more flexible for desktops and laptops.

Cheers,
Dave

Comment: Re:I wish we didn't need something like this (Score 3, Insightful) 583

by hey! (#47749109) Attached to: New Nail Polish Alerts Wearers To Date Rape Drugs

No need to paint the male gender as a whole as being filled with sociopaths. It's just the law of large numbers at work. There's maybe 30 million American men in the age rage that are likely to pick up srange women; if just 1/10 % of them are sociopathic predators that's 30,000 predators; and since they *are* predators they'll be overrepresented in young women's encounters with men in pick-up scenarios. Small numbers can produce disproportionate problems. In this case it represents numbers the actions of such a small proportion of men that our ideas about how normal people act aren't a reliable guide.

Drink spiking is a very rare crime. Most studies that look for evidence of it find very little. The highest I found was a government study which found date rape drugs in 4.5% of the cases from four sexual assault clinics. Note this is 4.5% of the cases where the assault occurred, so we're not talking about 4.5% of encounters, we're talking 4.5% of rapes. 4.5% is certainly high enough to be a concern in certain situations, like residential parties at a college. In such a situation a date rape drug detector might actually have some utility, even though it addresses relatively rare actions by a tiny proportion of men.

A bigger concern than what we think of as a "date rape drug" is alcohol itself. The same study that found date rape drugs in 4.5% of sexual assault samples found alcohol in 55%. This result is consistently found across studies: alcohol is very frequently associated with sexual assault -- around half of the time. This is especially concerning because some people (men and women both) don't believe that surreptitiously incapacitating someone with alcohol in order to have sex is rape. They don't distinguish ethically between two people getting drunk and having sex and one of them slipping extra alcohol into a drink.

But the fact remains most men wouldn't do something like that. But that doesn't preclude the possibility that a woman might often encounter the few remaining men who would. A typical man has sex with a small number of women many times; a man who has sex with a large number of women only once is bound to be encountered by women disproportionately often.

Comment: Re:Meaning? (Score 1) 391

by philip.paradis (#47746129) Attached to: UK Police Warn Sharing James Foley Killing Video Is a Crime

I'll repeat the note that I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. Failure to consent to participation in a production does not imply assignment of copyright. Perhaps you were thinking of case law involving works produced for hire; I'm confident the victim didn't pay to have his own execution rendered to video, unless you count paying with his life. Perhaps I'm missing something here and his estate will come forward with a claim for financial damages on grounds of copyright, though. Should such a claim arise, I'd be keenly interested to see learn of their intended collection mechanism.

Comment: Re:A stupid consideration (Score 2) 507

by hey! (#47744757) Attached to: If Java Wasn't Cool 10 Years Ago, What About Now?

Exactly. If you want to regard yourself as an engineer, you have to start by accepting you are working to serve the interests of the client, not your career. I've seen so many problems occur because programmers want to have a certain technology on their resume. And the sad thing is that it works to get them through the HR filter. If HR is told to look for experience with a particular technology, it doesn't seem to matter whether the candidate's experience with that technology is failure.

Comment: Re:Suppression (Score 1) 391

by philip.paradis (#47728917) Attached to: UK Police Warn Sharing James Foley Killing Video Is a Crime

We know where you live.

I certainly hope so; I'd have to rate you as severely cognitively impaired otherwise. Please be advised that I'm a former service member and a firm believer in the exercise of second amendment rights. Have a great day, and if you're thinking of coming to visit, enjoy your flight!

Comment: Re:Meaning? (Score 1) 391

by philip.paradis (#47728853) Attached to: UK Police Warn Sharing James Foley Killing Video Is a Crime

I am not a lawyer, and this is not legal advice. It would seem that unless ISIS initiates content removal requests, the media in question would not be subject to ordinary reproduction restrictions, as it was released for public distribution by ISIS. This said, I urge you to consult competent legal counsel regarding jurisdictional considerations.

Comment: Re:The people of the UK. (Score 1) 391

by philip.paradis (#47728771) Attached to: UK Police Warn Sharing James Foley Killing Video Is a Crime

It's not him silly, it's "the people of the UK", who are you to claim immunity from the democratic will of society, where does this immunity end?

I don't care about relevant rules/restrictions/regulations/laws adhered to the by people the UK in matters such as this; that's largely my point. My immunity starts where their jurisdiction stops.

Your overreacting to something the head cop said "could" be considered illegal. I think if you dig a bit deeper than the click bait headline you'll find his real message was more along the lines of - "Yes we all know it's shocking, but please stop reacting as intended by those who perpetrated this act". There's also a cultural difference in the way the UK justice system operates, as a general rule UK public prosecutors are nowhere near as eager to be associated with frivolous convictions and "plea bargaining" as their US counterparts seem to be. UK society in general is less tolerant of "anti-social behaviour", it's their idea of "keeping the peace" and it works rather well for "the people of the UK".

I'd love to offer you the excuse that you must be unfamiliar with the way the UK treats freedom of expression, but judging by your last sentence you're plainly aware of the true state of affairs. You didn't even do a passable job of prettying it up with your preceding statements. At least we're in agreement that the UK clearly operates under different rules. Public communication of possible state criminal prosecution due to the dissemination of information such as the video in question amounts to one thing only: a veiled threat, no matter how politely put it may be. I don't have to accept that from where I sit.

Yeah right, you tell 'em how it is internet tough guy, lol.

Internet tough guy? I post with my full name, and my residential address is easy to come by. Please tell me you're not so cognitively impaired that you can't figure it out. I'll be glad to have this discussion with you in person if you like; please feel free to swing by the house whenever you like. I do ask that you provide a bit of advance notice, as I wouldn't want to mistake you for an unwelcome guest and take unfortunate adverse actions upon your arrival.

Disclaimer, not the AC, who btw has as much right to his privacy as the Foley family does to theirs.

You're absolutely correct that the AC I responded to has a right to his privacy. I have a corresponding right to call him a coward, and not simply in the AC sense. As for considerations regarding Foley's family wishes, he was a United States citizen. As soon as I receive a valid written communication from the his estate to the effect that they don't want people directly appraised of the savage acts committed against him, I'll gladly act in accordance with said wishes. As for your wishes on the matter, I suggest you print them out on quality cardstock, roll the pages into a neat little cylinder, and go fuck yourself with it. Enjoy, champ.

Always draw your curves, then plot your reading.

Working...