Unrelated to his book, but anyone else find Ed's last name mildly amusing?
English is not my first language so when we say "Snowden", unless we really try to do an American English accent, it can sometimes sound like "Snowedii-n".
His last name means:
> English: habitational name from any of the many minor places called from hills where the snow lay long (Old English snāw ‘snow’ + dūn ‘hill’). [0]
"To be snowed in": when you can't exit the property/house because of fallen snow. Keep that same thought but remove the snow element (still "stuck") and replace property with country.
Now take "Snowden", but make the E longer and make it sound more like an I.
Edward Snowed-in. One could say that he is snowed in, in another country.
Similary, another NSA leakers name: Reality Winner.
Not poking fun at their names, just pointing out the irony because of the situation they are/was in.
Om jeg forstår deg rett.. Du som er Nordmann kjenner vel kanskje til at vi måtte hente eksperthjelp fra noen karer nede i USA før vi kunne begynne å bore olje. Ingen Nordmann dykket den gangen, vi måtte ha hjelp. Ved å følge din logikk burde de jo vært Norske, siden slike folk visstnok er enkle å finne? Det samme dypdykket jeg refererer til her endte også i dødsfall av en eller flere av de Amerikanerne som turte det dykket her nede i Norsk sjø, på grunn av en ulykke.
Uansett, med tanke på Nord Stream, vi snakker om en sabotasje-operasjon med eksplosiver under vann. Slikt man ofte ser i klisjè action-filmer, men som (nesten) aldri skjer i virkeligheten. Mener ikke å si at noe av det du skriver er feil i teorien - tror bare muligens du undervurderer skalaen på en slik operasjon. Det er åpenbart en godt planlagt militær operasjon.
Thank you for that additional context. I didn’t realize that Norway had been wholly dependent on US deep sea diving expertise when the oil industry was founded, and that it was relatively recent.
It depends what you mean by recent. The divers who brought those skills to Norway in the eighties had developed the techniques in the Gulf of Mexico a few years earlier. The eighties may be seen as recent or not, depending on your timescale. It's long enough ago that the knowledge has spread widely and much new equipment has been developed, such as the robots.
What? You're thinking of some other dive. I'm talking about the dive that was done in '78 to demonstrate that we had the ability to fix the underwater pipes at that depth. It's THE dive that made us literally filthy rich as a nation, in the years after. Everything depended on the outcome of this dive. No one had attempted anything like this before, that's why we brought in experts from the US.
Do not underestimate the importance of this event. Surprised you didn't know this.
It happened on February 7th 1978. Skånevikfjorden, Norway. On the West Coast. Taylor Diving Company brought in 3 divers + crew.
David Hoover, one of the three American divers, died in the accident that day. RIP
> It's long enough ago that the knowledge has spread widely and much new equipment has been developed, such as the robots.
No one would disagree. If you're saying that it's possible for these robots to plant explosives - I wouldn't know but I can believe that. In this case it's irrelevant.
Ultimately, the capability is beyond the reach of the workers you are talking about. The NYT article produced zero evidence, scant details (including laughable ones like a "Polish yacht".) It was truly a pathetic attempt at diversion-- I would have expected something better, like they did with Iraq, but the truth is they don't care enough to bother because liberals do their work for them. And as the critique published above points out, the authors have previously engaged in wholesale fraud for the security state, writing articles about the fake "Russian bounties" in Afghanistan, etc.
“It is obvious that [leftists] are not cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality.”
― Theodore Kaczynski
I'm reading the book not his manifesto version. There are no mentions of bombs in his book so the fact that he's the unabomber is of no importance. He's facing the consequences of his actions (good!). Doesn't mean that the book isn't good.
> would conflate liberals and leftists?
The book is from the 90s. You have to factor that in to be sure that he's conflating anything really. Lets also remember that Kaczynski is a literal genius. Top 1% of intelligence. Based on this also I don't believe that he thinks it makes any difference OR it made perfect sense in the times when he wrote it.
It's irrelevant because in a two-party political system they both (leftists+liberals) side to the left. The psychology (traits) of leftism/liberals are similar. The psychology (traits) of conservatives are the same no matter what "sub-type" (in lack of a better word) of conservative they claim to be because they side to the right. Wouldn't you call a neo-conservatives a conservative?
Since Ted is from the US he lives in the forementioned two-party political system. Making the distinction between leftist and liberals makes more sense imo in the European political system (not two-party) and perhaps others.
Left/Right, the political leaning can be observed because of various clues and traits. It's well understood. In academia and elsewhere.
> reactionary conservatives
Absolutely! Kaczynski also goes hard into conservatives. You should read the book, he is also criticising his own political leaning. He isn't so political-focused in his book. It's more on the sociology/psychology side.
> Also, a web-app is in general a better user experience when compared to a desktop app, in this scenario. Because it is easier for the user to launch and use.
Embed an icon to your software, pin to taskbar or the system tray. User clicks icon -> large, non-minimizable popup window appears, gets users attention -> 'generate report?' -> Yes or No button.
Much better than having the user type some URL. They'll remember the icon but not the URL. Two mouse clicks, no keyboard needed.
> Also, the start menu search functionality works flawlessly for me, always showing me the app or file I want.
It took the interns at Microsoft, what, nearly 10 years to fix the whole search function fiasco? Not impressive, and a working search function can not be considered a feature.
> Previously if you wanted to go into the windows registry editor, you had to know the right incantation, but now, all you have to do is hit the Windows/Meta key and type 'reg'
> it even shows you power-user stuff really intuitively.
Examples?
In my circles I can't think of a single developer and/or power-user that use, or plan on using Windows 11 (except in a virtual machine for quick compatibility-testing). We're all on micropatched W7's or Windows 10 Enterprise LTSC - otherwise Linux. W11 has sort of become one of the topics we joke about during lunch.
Power-users do not care about a cool and stylish UI, new icons or a simple working search function.
> A lot of these blog posts (like many comments in this thread sadly) are low effort hate/FUD for farming clickbait/karma rather than objective analysis.
ghacks has been covering Windows for many years. It's also not clickbait and MS are turning the operating system into an ad platform, unfortunately.
>We're all on micropatched W7's or Windows 10 Enterprise LTSC - otherwise Linux. W11 has sort of become one of the topics we joke about during lunch.
Look, I wasn't tryin to start a Windows 7 vs 10 vs 11 vs MacOS vs Linux holy war, I was just pointing out that contrary to the article, I have yet to see any ads in the Windows 11 start menu, and the start menu search function works flawlessly on Windows 11 for me, contrary to what this shallow blog article which had no substance backed by tests and evidence.
>It took the interns at Microsoft, what, nearly 10 years to fix the whole search function fiasco? Not impressive, and a working search function can not be considered a feature.
As long as it works flawlessly for me in the present day, what difference does the past 10 years make for me? Microsoft devs aren't paid by my wages and I always judge the current version of any tech product, not some relics form the past. Linux also works great now for gaming, so who cares it didn't work 10 years ago?
>Power-users do not care about a cool and stylish UI, new icons or a simple working search function.
Average Joe users who user their PC for entertainment and work, with a life outside of micropatching their OS, do care about things being simple and working out of the box, and that's the target audience for such an OS. Powerusers are a special breed no company targets because they can never be pleased so it's never profitable. They have GNU/Linux for that.
> contrary to what this shallow blog article posted with no substance.
We'll see. If I'm not mistaken the author has written books on Windows even. Why would he lie about something so stupid? ghacks is not a blog it's a tech news site and pretty well known. Perhaps you don't like it because of the sites critical view regarding Windows?
> Average Joe users who user their PC for entertainment and work
Don't bring up average Joe - we're talking about power-users, you were the one who brought up 'power-user stuff' and that's what I quoted you on. I wanted to share the perspective of someone who do not share your praise and excitement for W11. Many seem to not share your experience that is an ad free, lovely OS.
>Many seem to not share your experience that is an ad free, lovely OS.
Because many just love to shit on it without having used it lately, because hating everything Microsoft is a timeless trend. Just like hating Nickelback and Internet Explorer. You must hate them because the internet said so, otherwise you get downvoted, to teach you to fall in line with the official party line.
People would also hate Edge despite benchmarks showing its latest iterations, even before the transition to chromium, as being one of the fastest and most performat browsers out there. If Microsoft would cure cancer tomorrow, people would still hate them just because.
Therefore the opinion of various heavily biased internet swarm minds is largely irelevant and should be taken with a glorious boulder of salt.
Don't get me wrong, I hate on Microsoft enough when they deserve it, but, as a long time Windows and Linux user, I can't really fault W11 as an OS as it's the best windows so far by a long shot IMHO.
I also hated W11 when I installed it a year ago, but since then all updates brough only improvements. I never though I'd say this but it's now a much better alternative to windows 10 for both coding and entertainment, it has put me off from switching to Linux fully, that, and Fedora and OpenSUSE deciding to remove VA-API hardware acceleration for AMD users.
I get the logic regarding hating on a product because it's trendy, however, I've followed MS Windows for a long time and more importantly listened to people around me, skilled teams of Windows software developers; with many different personalities and backgrounds; GUI designers, system driver devs, kernel devs, windows internals experts, and what do we all seem to have in common? We do not like Windows 11. Many of us used to praise Windows back in the day (WIN2K-XP-7 era).
To be frank with you, MS deserves all the criticism and I truly believe the 'biased internet swarm minds' to be correct this one time. Agree to disagree.
> People would also hate Edge despite benchmarks showing its latest iterations, even before the transition to chromium, as being one of the fastest and most performat browsers out there.
No Firefox is but it depends on the hardware. I'd encourage anyone to do their own benchmark - don't let anyone fool you with these paid benchmark guru sites.
> Records obtained by law enforcement from Google LLC (“Google”) and Amazon, Inc. (“Amazon”) provide evidence of the defendant [name]’s control of Z-Library.
They clearly haven't read any "OPSEC 101"-books. Rookie mistake.
English is not my first language so when we say "Snowden", unless we really try to do an American English accent, it can sometimes sound like "Snowedii-n".
His last name means:
> English: habitational name from any of the many minor places called from hills where the snow lay long (Old English snāw ‘snow’ + dūn ‘hill’). [0]
"To be snowed in": when you can't exit the property/house because of fallen snow. Keep that same thought but remove the snow element (still "stuck") and replace property with country.
Now take "Snowden", but make the E longer and make it sound more like an I.
Edward Snowed-in. One could say that he is snowed in, in another country.
Similary, another NSA leakers name: Reality Winner.
Not poking fun at their names, just pointing out the irony because of the situation they are/was in.
[0]: https://www.familysearch.org/en/surname?surname=snowden