You know what else people like to think about? Doing something that actually makes a difference, not just following along with pseudo science and politics (where there is obvious money to be made by the few). And no, I was not confusing the change in global mean temperature with anything. I said nothing to lead anyone to believe I did.

Of course. We're talking fractions of a degree here. But that's to my point of needing emotion to sell this.

Why is that? I've seen some reasonably convincing evidence that the average temperatures are getting warmer in the past 100+ years.

The real problem is that no one has been able to explain WHY without pseudo-science, emotional ploys, and politics which makes swallowing "humans are runing the world!" difficult for those of us who like facts.

So a GUI is required for doing things that all good admin recognize aren't really appropriate to be doing on a server. I'm not seeing why this can't be done on a desktop machine, even a remote console to one.

GUIs on a server has and always will enable and basically promote poor usage practices on said server. Maybe Microsoft is interested in paving a road to make their server products more in line with the rest of the server marketplace by getting away from that type of thing. By allowing or encouraging this type of user behavior they are being blamed for the problems it causes (rightly or wrongly). I know I'd want to get away from that as well as to get a shot at possibly winning back some business from the majority (by volume) server operating systems being used today (only about 36% Windows, the rest overwhelmingly some unix variant) by getting in line with the requirements of the administrators of those machines......and that necessarily means forcing those who develop the software they run on your OS to get in line with this as well.

That's the point: Microsoft is telling these vendors its time to do things differently. To do things in a way that makes Windows server services more competitive with the rest of the marketplace.

Also, running telecom packages on Windows server is a joke. I work in telecom. Every last piece of telecom server software that I've come across that is available for Windows only was made by someone who has (or had at the time the decision was made) no clue how the telecom business works. I have exactly one Windows server running in my datacenter, and it is to run the VMWare cluster. Absolutely nothing else is running windows or a GUI of any kind. This is at a fairly high volume voip telecom.

Wow, did you just bring back some memories. Where did I leave that token ringer tester?

It's better for poorly trained underlings. It's much worse for things that actually matter, like proper change control and management, service cloning, mass changes, and many other things admins of actual servers of any number need to do. There are all easy with text based configs, and it works almost exactly the same way with exactly the same tools regardless of the application or who made it.

And as long as there is no incentive to make proper command line versions of Windows server software, you will always need that slow, bloated GUI to do certain things. Certain things that have been possible on proper CLI systems for decades.

I'm quite positive you too are missing the point here. What part of this requires a GUI?

I seriously doubt you've done it, or you'd know that you aren't "sparking 3-4 pairs of wires together". You are bridging 12v (which you'll find somewhere in the harness) to the ignition, whatever other separated required systems are on the switch depends on the car, and possibly the accessories (but not necessary). Then you are "sparking" the starter solenoid "s" terminal lead to the bundle or some other 12v source.

And you "clear" the steering lock with a slide hammer. And then jam a flat head screwdriver into what is left and fuck the hot wiring, because you can just turn the ignition switch with the screwdriver. No wiring necessary.

A 79 Datsun doesn't need power to an ignition coil? Did you forget to mention the part about it having a mechanically injected diesel motor in it?

This is really, really basic shit. No spark=no run. No voltage to the ignition coil=no spark. You can crank the starter all fucking day and the motor won't run.

Yes, figuring which and how to bridge 4 or more wires is absolutely just as easy as sparking 2 together like in the movies. I'm obviously being totally misleading.

Also, you have plenty of time to figure this out with your multi meter in a nice well lit area while you are stealing a car. And the ignition switches are really easy to get to on things made after the 70s.

That stuff was totally easy. What was I thinking?

Seriously /. posters. Just stop it. This really is embarrassing to everyone.

I think your reading comprehension is probably pretty poor if that was you take-away. I was arguing the simple fact that you don't just "spark two wires together" like in the movies and like the poster I responded two stated.

I work on auto electronics as a side job. This includes wiring race cars from scratch. I've got a better than average idea of how an automotive electrical system works. So, please, do try to argue facts with me if you want to keep this up. I can do it from rote memory while you google away at it.

I have no idea what this post is supposed to mean. Are you trying to say your 1999 Corolla needs only two wires bridged to start and run? If so, it's the only one in existence.