Slashdot Mirror

Every time people ask why we fund the space agencies, here is your answer. The majority of the data we DO have in this situation is from downlooking satellites from ESA and NASA.The The Deep Space Climate Observatory was mothballed for almost a decade and yet it has sensors on it that could be helping significantly with measuring ash density source. There are several other vehicles that can help significantly with this and other problems that cost many, many times the project cost, but all people see is the big number at the end of each budget, not the benefits.

http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:7AOx1mO30NoJ:www.erollisimarr.com/forum/showthread.php%3Ft%3D18794+stoppoliceware&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

It's a forum, where a member copy/pasted some of the old site's mission, and asked about them. There is probably more interesting stuff available on the web, regarding stoppoliceware, if anyone is interested. Or, google for any of these terms:

"The CBDTPA is a bill (S. 2048) proposed in Congress by Senators Fritz Hollings (D-SC) and Ted Stevens (R-Alaska), along with Senators Daniel Inouye (D-HI), John Breaux (D-LA), Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA). The acronym stands for "Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act". Note that the CBDTPA was originally known as the "SSSCA" while in draft form."

Ahhhh - here's the bill:
http://www.politechbot.com/docs/cbdtpa/hollings.s2048.032102.html

Google Cache for anyone interested in reading it

yes its exchange internally

openNet is what they brand it as

feel free to correct me with evidance that it was not the case any more but I know 2 exchange servers there and this say's otherwise

exchange has the recall ability and so does lotus notes
most other servers do not have this feature for very good reasons l

regards

John Jones

www.johnjones.me.uk my blog about email and digital communication

According to this article, they were migrating to Exchange in 2001. If it was set up by admins who knew what they were doing, they could have set the perms on the distribution list so only authorized users could use it.

(from Google Cache) Reading DNA sequences from single molecules of polymerase using nanotechnology

Quite true. A quick search shows that even XP RC1 was supposed to be as fast as Win2k before it was released. In some cases, it was supposedly slightly faster. Of course, we know that this is not quite the truth/reality. For example, some of the articles:
http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:DdOzbFHRPI8J:thesource.ofallevil.com/windowsxp/home/evaluation/whyupgrade/performance.mspx+xp+release+candidate+faster+than+windows-2000&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us
and
http://dgl.com/itinfo/2001/it010716.html

So, as implied by the OP... I'll believe it when I see it.

It's already kind of lame when someone spells it M$ or Micro$oft in a comment but...

Yeah. I'm one of the ones that had to learn to not be childish with that use on /.

Do you go back as far to CP/M? The history of CP/M, CP/M-86, QDOS and the *original* PC-DOS? If you had - and I suspect you don't - you might cut some people some slack for that usage.

There exists a pre-PC-DOS link to a statement that Bill Gates put out regarding piracy of BASIC and denigrating everyone for how much money he was losing, how much he and his guys had invested in time and dollars and so forth. It was a little whiney, but he was pretty much spot on regarding the whole piracy thing. http://www.digibarn.com/collections/newsletters/homebrew/V2_01/gatesletter.html

And in those days - just like today - we all paid close attention to Intel. The 8086 was out there, we were all waiting for CP/M-86 stability to get a better computing environment. And CP/M-86 was taking time because it was work and because it was going to be (and eventually was) a quality product.

Seattle Computer Products, a hardware mfgr, created the Quick and Dirty Operating System (QDOS) and despite revisionist history, to ostensibly debug their hardware in anticipation of CP/M-86.

The follow-on history is very nicely summarized right here: http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:tIEkLM0yDDkJ:maben.homeip.net/static/S100/software/microsoft/DOS/The%2520origins%2520of%2520MS-DOS.ppt+qdos+S-100+quick+and+dirty+operating+system&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us - that's the html/cached version, if you want the PPT file, it's here: http://maben.homeip.net/static/S100/software/microsoft/DOS/The%20origins%20of%20MS-DOS.ppt

Part of the backstory on his money loss was that the Osborne had come out, but then the KayPro did too, was doing better, and was getting a lot of attention for the superior (to MS) S-BASIC. So, sales of MS BASIC were not what the company expected. In fact, here's the backstory on Microsoft's creation and the importance of MS-BASIC. I putting the cached link and the orig - I couldn't get the orig server to respond as I write this: http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:kKA51ycXpCAJ:www.thocp.net/companies/microsoft/microsoft_company.htm+history+of+altair+basic&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us and http://www.thocp.net/companies/microsoft/microsoft_company.htm

But add up the history: BASIC w/ license disputes, QDOS w/ license disputes, OS/2 w/ license disputes, Windows w/ license disputes.

Microsoft was once a darling company to many of us. They freed us from the clutches of IBM mini-computers and mainframes at work. It was a pain in the ass, but we could do desktop programming in BASIC rather than getting time to do our FORTRAN calculations on an IBM.

IBM was under attack by the US Justice Dept. in the early 80s - we couldn't have been happier. Then, Microsoft - as a company - was becoming the new IBM, with all of its evil.

I - and many others - were quite accustomed to calling them Micro$oft and M$ by the mid-to-late 80s for their stunts.

I lived through that history. I watched a company that I supported putting the screws to people in the industry.

I was pissed the first time a pretty good post of mine was labeled troll and attacked with

It's already kind of lame when someone spells it M$ or Micro$oft in a comment but...

Yeah. I'm one of the ones that had to learn to not be childish with that use on /.

Do you go back as far to CP/M? The history of CP/M, CP/M-86, QDOS and the *original* PC-DOS? If you had - and I suspect you don't - you might cut some people some slack for that usage.

There exists a pre-PC-DOS link to a statement that Bill Gates put out regarding piracy of BASIC and denigrating everyone for how much money he was losing, how much he and his guys had invested in time and dollars and so forth. It was a little whiney, but he was pretty much spot on regarding the whole piracy thing. http://www.digibarn.com/collections/newsletters/homebrew/V2_01/gatesletter.html

And in those days - just like today - we all paid close attention to Intel. The 8086 was out there, we were all waiting for CP/M-86 stability to get a better computing environment. And CP/M-86 was taking time because it was work and because it was going to be (and eventually was) a quality product.

Seattle Computer Products, a hardware mfgr, created the Quick and Dirty Operating System (QDOS) and despite revisionist history, to ostensibly debug their hardware in anticipation of CP/M-86.

The follow-on history is very nicely summarized right here: http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:tIEkLM0yDDkJ:maben.homeip.net/static/S100/software/microsoft/DOS/The%2520origins%2520of%2520MS-DOS.ppt+qdos+S-100+quick+and+dirty+operating+system&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=us - that's the html/cached version, if you want the PPT file, it's here: http://maben.homeip.net/static/S100/software/microsoft/DOS/The%20origins%20of%20MS-DOS.ppt

Part of the backstory on his money loss was that the Osborne had come out, but then the KayPro did too, was doing better, and was getting a lot of attention for the superior (to MS) S-BASIC. So, sales of MS BASIC were not what the company expected. In fact, here's the backstory on Microsoft's creation and the importance of MS-BASIC. I putting the cached link and the orig - I couldn't get the orig server to respond as I write this: http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:kKA51ycXpCAJ:www.thocp.net/companies/microsoft/microsoft_company.htm+history+of+altair+basic&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us and http://www.thocp.net/companies/microsoft/microsoft_company.htm

But add up the history: BASIC w/ license disputes, QDOS w/ license disputes, OS/2 w/ license disputes, Windows w/ license disputes.

Microsoft was once a darling company to many of us. They freed us from the clutches of IBM mini-computers and mainframes at work. It was a pain in the ass, but we could do desktop programming in BASIC rather than getting time to do our FORTRAN calculations on an IBM.

IBM was under attack by the US Justice Dept. in the early 80s - we couldn't have been happier. Then, Microsoft - as a company - was becoming the new IBM, with all of its evil.

I - and many others - were quite accustomed to calling them Micro$oft and M$ by the mid-to-late 80s for their stunts.

I lived through that history. I watched a company that I supported putting the screws to people in the industry.

I was pissed the first time a pretty good post of mine was labeled troll and attacked with

There isn't a whole lot of info.

Companies such as Stardock have zero DRM on their games.

It explains why Stardock, even as an extremely small company in hard economic times, is having incredible profits. Their game Sins of a Solar Empire got rave reviews back in March and is now receiving top 10 game awards from almost every game site / magazine.

They even released their company report to the public! That's a cool company.

http://74.125.45.132/search?q=cache:saGoWJP1dCsJ:www.stardock.com/media/stardockcustomerreport-2008.pdf+stardock+2008+report&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

From a business prospective, it's important to create DRM that doesn't prohibit the user, but still protects your product at the same time.

That's what I've observed in the industry anyway.