Slashdot

Georgia killed 6 people... Russia has killed thousands of Georgians.
Also of note is the fact that Russia staged this two front military effort in less than 12 hours, before Putin left the Olympics... Sounds like a pre-planned deal just waiting for an excuse to me.

You're a fucking racist prick. I'll be glad when people like you are hung from lamp posts.

Those are, like, needed to remove the hard drive, right?

I'm hoping some joker with the next viable vista virus uses it to trigger trusted computing into locking machines.
Lets see vista's adoption rate when word gets out it bricks your entire system if you get a virus.

Vista's security chain works as designed and intended, preventing from you to inject an untrusted bootloader into the bootstrap. Isn't that what we -want- from our security systems? This isnt' a case of "Microsoft" holding our data hostage, this is a case of our own security policies WORKING.

If I were to be running Linux, with equivalent protection, I'd be right pissed if it could be trivially rootkitted/bypassed by swapping in a malicious bootloader.

The ONLY flaw I see in the entire Vista/TPM system is that users don't seem to have a way of manually trusting things they genuinely want to trust. If it hasn't been blessed by MS its not trusted -- that's a fine policy for general users, but if I, as the hardware want to trust a specific bit of code (e.g. the linux boot loader) then I should be able to manually sign it somehow, and add my personal key to my personal install of Vista. And then the grub bootloader I signed will be trusted on my (and only my) PC.

All the 'chatter on the internets' is currently centered around how to disable UAC, how to disable driver signing, how to go back to running windows as insecurely as possible. i would prefer to see the discussion take a more intelligent direction -- how to obtain keys/certificates, how to add them to Vista's chain of trust on a per PC or per domain basis, and how how sign code with them.

Signed drivers are a FANTASTIC idea. not being able to sign drivers myself for my own hardware is EVIL. But MS --does-- have programs in place to let you sign code with 'development drivers' which are designed to only be valid on your PC... its just that most of the discussion surround the issue is how to disable it, and how evil MS for deciding what is blessed and what is not.

I mean, take Stallman, even -he- who wrote the GPLv3 in part to counter DRM isn't against code signing. He just requires that the keys necessary to sign code be included, so the owner of the hardware and user of GPLv3 code can sign it, and thereby be free to make modifications and excercise all the freedoms intended by the gpl.

When I think of satellite radio, I think of this:
*Major genres unrepresented.
*Station playlists that would become predictable within a week.
*Sub-genres within all genres utterly unrepresented in general (for example, one Metal station on all of Sirius, and it only plays death metal).
*A whole slew of stations essentially devoted to playing the exact same stuff that you hear on standard Top 40 radio.
*Commercials, despite being advertised as commercial-free.
*Annoying DJs (the receivers display the name/artist playing, you do NOT need DJs trying to be funny between every song).
*Oh, and a monthly fee on top of that.

Frankly, satellite radio was created 10 years too late. Why should I put up with satellite radio when I can use my mp3 player?

are still left in the 70's building 5 litre v8 guzzlers with solid rear axles

though looking at GM and Fords financial statements they wont be building much of anything if they dont change, fast.

In other news, the public will phase out Mercedes purchases by 2015.

That's exactly right.

I'm reasonably sure that the passengers on those doomed 9/11 flights sat back and thought about the fat settlement cheques that they were going to get from the airlines for "mental anguish and emotional distress".

Not that I blame them - nobody thought that they were going to be flown into a freaking building. If they'd had any idea, I'm sure they would have rushed the terrorists. Now, the passengers are more likely to say, "fuck it, I'm dead anyway but if we take him out we've got a chance."

I also think that Flight 93 was shot down, and I don't blame the US for doing that either. I understand the "let's roll" cover story that let the folks on the plane die as heroes. Of course, I don't think the passengers had time to watch the news, call their families, and say goodbye.

President Bush didn't lie about anything re:Iraq. If you've got a problem with anything he said, take it up with the intelligence community.

Screaming "he lied! he lied!" doesn't make it so. Much like a fat man wanting to believe the tray of cookies he just ate are calorie free doesn't make it to. ;)

mmm. Cookies....

Ontario != Quebec.

Also, as we say in Quebec, "fuck you". Don't you dare compare us to France, it's insulting.

why make this big deal out of the fact that it turned out to be a lie that he was trying to acquire more?

Maybe because the lie was used to trick the American people into starting a war that has cost us hundreds of billions of dollars, wrecked our economy, undermined our position in the world and put us in a far less secure position, killed hundreds of thousands of people, destabilized the middle east, and lined the pockets of the friends and supporters of the people who told the lie with money stolen from the US treasury on the basis of that lie?

The problem was it was a lie, crafted and used to achieve a specific dishonorable result. The fact that other claims that could have been made about superficially similar subjects were true (and were known to be true at the time) has absolutely no bearing on the situation.

--MarkusQ

You're right, 21 pages seems excessive to me as well.

Ummm...so you're essentially throwing EVERYTHING that makes you a republican out the window to vote for the most leftist presidential candidate from a major party EVER?

If timeshifting is a court-granted right, then a broadcaster saying you can't do it and a recording system believing them should be plenty of evidence that it's time to change to a system you control.

US Courts don't grant rights. They only affirm that we do or do not have a right.

The Constitution was written with "implicit allow" rules for citizens and "implicit deny" for government.

Over the years people have lost sight of this fact and that has been seized upon those in a position of power. The average citizen now believes if a right isn't listed in the Constitution, they don't have it aka "implicit deny". Even worst they think the government has an "implicit allow" aka they are without bounds.