Given that's the definition of socialism, all do. Well, that's ONE definition of socialism from a respected dictionary. A better definition might be "a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned or controlled by the state" (changing AND to OR).

Are you thinking of a socialist country that doesn't meet that definition?

Given that's the definition, that's why when Obama said the government needs to exercise it's "ownership and management responsibilities" of General Motors, and similar statements, people call those ideas socialist - because government "ownership and management" is the very definition of socialism.

Last I checked, Windows doesn't have sed, grep, awk, etc.
Nor is the OS designed to allow such tools to work. How would you:
find /etc -mtime -2

You can't. There simply no way to find recent configuration changes in Windows. In Linux, it takes less than a second.
That powerful DOES mean you'd need to have learned how to use "find". (or just use the GUI like you would under Windows.)
  If you spend some time learning the command line, ordinary tasks can be done ten times faster and tasks that are impossible under Windows become possible, if not trivial.

Learning the commands is SO much faster then clicking through layers and layers of menus. Windows is very easy to use in that it's discoverable. A three year old can sit down and start clicking around on Windows and discover how to use it. You don't have to know anything. On Linux, at least with the command line, you need to know what you're doing. The difference is similar to talking to someone who know vs trying
  to communicate with someone without knowing the language . You CAN communicate using gestures, without having to learn the language first, but DANG it's slow and cumbersome. Windows is like that. You don't have to know anything in order to do it, and things take ten times as long as they take if you learn the (Linux) language.

True, almost all software produced has quite a few security holes. I just fixed some security holes in online classes that - cybersecurity. These are courses put out by a well known government agency that specializes in safety and security, but that agency doesn't come close to securing it's own systems.

HOWEVER our buildings are also quite vulnerable to Chinese missiles. We haven't secured our shopping centers, our sports stadiums, or our power plants. China could very easily wipe out any of them. Does that mean we'd accept it if they did? If China shot down a US airliner would we say "eh, it's our own fault for not securing our airspace"? Of course not. We'd hold China accountable, very quickly. Probably within a matter of hours. That's the biggest failing - we've chosen to sit down and allow China to attack us for the last several years, with no real response from us.

Anyone can easily kick in the front door of your house. If they do so, we don't blame the victim for not having a six inch thick steel door. We throw the assailant in the slammer.

Probably, our software will never be secure for the same reasons our houses won't be secure - because security is HARD. It's much easier to break something than to build something. Building something that can't be broken is almost impossible. To be competent at software security takes about six years of training for a typical corporate programmer, one who doesn't really understand software engineering as a science. An otherwise skilled programmer could learn to make his good software into fairly secure software in three years. That's about, what an extra $40k - $60k per year for a programmer with several years worth of extra education / training. How many organizations are willing to pay that cost for secure systems?

  I have fifteen YEARS of experience in software security, but no one is offering me a job that pays a reasonable salary, not when they can instead hire an idiot for $40K to create a heaping pile of garbage that mostly "works", for a year or two until he's in a different position.

Yep, all that mumbo jumbo about time cloaks comes down to this:

They found a way to turn a laser on and off really fast, and at the other end of the fiber undo it so it appears to have stayed on. The whole "cloak" thing is just the idea that while the laser is off, some other signal could be sent on the fiber. Yay, with more refinement they can use it to send two channels on one fiber. The current implementation isn't able to read the second channel.

In theory, you could cut into a backbone provider's fiber and insert one of these transmitters that adds a second channel. At the other end of the fiber, you could insert the "undo" unit, so the owner of the fiber couldn't see your signal. You'd be using their fiber without their knowledge. Of course, a fiber equipped router at each end would achieve the same result.

That's an interesting question.

I looked over my previous relationships, romantic and otherwise, and made a list of problems, and what caused them. Mainly, things about ME that caused them.
From that list, I worked on a list of what I was looking for. There were a few things I wanted IN a relationship, like honesty. Relationships are (I thought) hard work, so I needed to look at what I was getting FROM the relationship, and there were a few things specific to the kind of PERSON I wanted to be with. I wish I were a home right now, where I stil have my list around somewhere. I can remember a few, though:

Characteristics of the relationship I wanted:
      Honesty
      Trust
      Mutual respect (both politeness and some admiration)
      Peace, not drama (home should be a refuge)

If I'm going to work hard on a relationship, what do I want to gain from it?:
        Companionship (we should really be present, not mentally somewhere else)
        Fun! (Willing to get up and do things, try new things. What else does "fun" mean to me?)
        A reasonable sex life
        Encouragement

What kind of person
        From above - honest, trusting, respectful, no drama queens, reasonable sexual attitudes
        Good mother or no kids - I don't want to marry a "bad" mom

There were a couple more that I don't recall. Reading over the list from time to time, I proceeded to try to BE those things. If I want an honest, respectful woman, I better be an honest, respectful man, for example. I prayed for help on most of that. I had to read it a few times to remind myself.

After meeting my wife, I found something else that's near the top of the list for marriage. When I'm not sure of something, when I'm "of two minds" about something,
I think about it, discuss it, or read more information to make a decision. I don't yell and argue with myself, of course. That would be ridiculous. When a married couple is of two minds about something, can they not also think about it, discuss it, and get more information, just as one would do if you were split between two options? My wife and I do that, for the most part. I don't think we've ever really argued - just discussed and learned moe information until a decision became clear.

If your mouth is hurting you, you do not get angry at your mouth. Rather, you care for it, identifying the problem and tending to it to stop the hurt. In a marriage, if a mouth causes pain, doesn't it make sense that the couple should find the problem and take care of it, rather than getting angry at the hurt from the mouth? It doesn't matter if it's the mouth I was born with causing me pain or if it's the mouth my wife was born with causing me pain, as a life-long couple we deal with either in pretty much the same way. So I've added to my list this instruction:

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife and they shall be one flesh" (Genesis 2 verse 24)

(Yes, I've learned that implies it's wise to be very careful who you cleave unto and become one flesh with!)

 

I was looking for a special lady, a one-in-a-million. (Okay, so maybe one in ten thousand.). It's REALLY hard to meet and sift through a thousand women just meeting people around town. I tried, and I did have brief conversations with 60-120 or so, and had lunch with 20-30. Online, I had more available women to see, with tools to narrow it down before starting up a conversation.

I married my one-in-a-million five years ago.

(My first marriage taught me that choosing from the five or ten available women in my social circle was a REALLY bad idea.)

It's kind of funny - before clicking the link to even see what kind of non-profit it is, I thought of a non-profit know that collects old computers, images them, and sells them. That was before I read that the link had anything to do with that. Basic desktops really haven't advanced that much in the last few years, so there are a lot of "old" computers being given away or sold for garage sale prices that are perfectly usable. A sizeable portion of the time, people are replacing computers and the only thing "wrong" with them is a bunch of malware.

So you want to fund giving away refurbished computers? Sell the best ones. Selling one for $250 will fund reimaging / reconfiguring 10 others. Sell one for $125, that will probably cover your costs of five giveaways.

"That is where America's occupy movement failed."

That, and the fact that they had no goal, nothing specific they were trying to accomplish other than to complain that some people (ie college grads) earn more than others (mostly dropouts and liberal arts majors). Also, their complete laziness - refusal to DO anything other than sit in a park smoking weed.

So yeah, Turks, don't fall into those two traps. Find an actual solution to advocate for, then do something about it. It seems that getting high and whining doesn't improve your life effectively.

90% of tech support is troubleshooting skills and communication with the customer. Learning to apply those same skills to a different technology isn't that big of a deal.

When interviewing for tech people, I ask how they would go about fixing something - anything. I can train a good car mechanic to fix networks a lot easier than I can train someone who knows all about networking but nothing about troubleshooting.

You wete do right on 1-11, then out comes the GIANT tinfoil hat for #12.

That post got mangled.

While in his senate office, you mean? Assuming that were true, it wouldn't matter because this was a campaign meeting, at a private office, not his senate office. Personally, I think leaders should be able to have frank, honest discussions with advisors. I know that JFK's private consultations with his attorney general (and brother) helped avoid World War 3. For the consultations to be forthright, that means they aren't public, and therefore carefully worded for political purposes.

While in his semester office, you mean? Assuming that were true, it elephant matter nectar this was a campaign meeting, at a private office, not his senate office. Personally, I think leaders should be able to have frank, honest discussions with advisors. I know that JFK's private consultations with his attorney general (and brother) helped avoid World War 3. For the consultations to be forthright, that means those discussions aren't public.

That's easy on Linux. Much easier than on Windows because everything is just a file, there's no registry or anything like that, and no copy protection. In some of the very first Linix distros, that's pretty much how the installer worked - it treasured a "backup" of a default system. Just copy the files and install the bootloader, basically.

I created a system that backs up your Linux system to a virtual machine, so the backup can be booted directy, or be restored by copying it to a hard drive. Even cooler, Linux can act as an external drive enclosure, so the empty machine can be plugged into the backup and booted from the backup file directly, wirh the hardware believing it's booting from a local drive...

<quote>
can't accept that as valid constitutionally. To me it looks horribly corrupt and subject to tremendous potentiality for abuse. (If I have to give you the evidence, then I don't have it to prove my innocence. If I give you access to my signing key, then you can forge messages and claim they came from me. etc.)
</quote>

The law handles both concerns. He was ordered to provide a decypted copy, so he still has (or can get) a copy and he doesn't give up the secret key. That's how it's normally handled with documentary evidence - both sides get a copy.

In SOME CP cases (not this one), after seeing the evidence and seeing that it really is CP, a judge will rule that the defense only gets access to the CP evidence, they don't get to keep a copy. In the cases I'm familiar with, that decision has been made reasonably - when the photos or videos MIGHT be underage, when the defense wants to contest that, they've gotten a copy. When it's been unquestionably CP, the perv was not allowed to keep a copy to enjoy.

I've seen other injustices with regard to CP cases, but the issues you're raised have been addressed pretty well.