Slashdot Mirror

i couldn't put it in the main article, but i spoke to Madhu back in november, and it was USD $24 million.

Luke that number is preposterous.

then that gives you some idea of how much of a threat A... err... the unnamed company that tried to bribe^Whire their engineers.

Brian Krzanich never even received that much.

Also it is a little misleading to characterize GS. Madhusudan as "another PhD in amongst 100 other PhDs". He is the one of the leaders of India's homegrown semiconductor movement.

my understanding was that it was neel who received the "offer", but i can't be sure. ahh.... yes it was. ohhh that's reeeallly interesting. fuckers who published the article REMOVED the bit about neel's "offer"... and "the author of the article no longer works with us". mmmm rrriiiight....

https://web.archive.org/web/20...

"Some of that open source zeal can be seen in the Shakti team here. Gala, who was offered a ‘good seven digit package’ by one of the big chip giants, decided against it. “This was an interview over a cup of coffee. The moment of realisation for me was sitting in the cafeteria, and seeing a hundred other PhDs there. The only distinction I had over them was Shakti. If I left it, I would just be another ball in the bag. So that’s why I didn’t leave,” he says."

Here is a daring article from 1945, maybe you can catch up?

Listen sweetcheeks - Megamergers aren't good or bad - they ARE.

Thus talked the pseudo-conservative who wouldn't be able to distinguish his Russell Kirk from his Eric Voegelin from his G. K. Chesterton.

Here, little fake-conservative, read some real ones for a change, will you? You may begin with Hilaire Belloc and proceed from there.

Here's a nice chart explaining how income inequality was both solved and created. In the 20's/30's we had enormous income inequality -- even worse than today -- but workers organized, fought, died and voted together for their rights. As a results, union membership expands in the 40's,50's and income inequality goes down. Reagan -- who's first election win was as president of a labor union ironically -- dismantled unions and demonized them. Membership goes down, inequality goes up.
None of this, of course, excludes the ability for their to be bad unions or union leaders any more than there are bad/corrupt judges in any judiciary. But instead, that just as a good judiciary is important for a functioning country, so is a good union system for income inequality. Which should make sense, as income inequality was literally the problem unions were created to solve.

https://www.amazon.com/Why-We-...
"Walker explains "how a good night's shut-eye can make us cleverer, more attractive, slimmer, happier, healthier, and ward off cancer.""

I'm about a third of the way through the book so far and it is just amazing. I will never take sleep for granted again.

Essentially, our brains are overclocked for high performance of a certain kind during the day and almost everyone absolutely need eight or so hours of good sleep each and every night for the brain to recover and stay healthy. (There is a very tiny number -- much less than 1% -- of people with a genetic mutation that lets them get by on less sleep.)

As one example, during the day, new factual information is stored in the hippocampus and then when you go to sleep NREM sleep moves the data to other part of the brain for long term storage. So, if you don't sleep enough that night, you lose much of those memories. Sleeping more a day or two later will never bring those memories back.

As another example, I just read today about how glial cells shrink during sleep so fluid can bathe the adjacent neurons and then the glial cells can remove toxic waste products that can lead to Alzheimer's.

He explains how drowsy driving causes more accidents and worse ones than drunk driving.

He also talks about how caffeine blocks receptors in the brain for adenosine (which causes "sleep pressure"). While caffeine may make it possible for people to get by with less sleep for a time, such users will still miss out on all the other health-giving parts of sleep as above -- and more, including greater creativity like from dreams.

That said, I'd add, for some people, coffee beans are the only beans they consume and in general eating beans and the phytonutrients they contain is health promoting. So, for some people, the health benefits of drinking coffee bean juice may outweigh issues of caffeine. But, there are lots of other beans people can eat that don't have caffeine in them.
https://well.blogs.nytimes.com...

So, bravo for making a great choice and sticking with it through caffeine withdrawal and into a healthier life.

See also in general:
http://web.archive.org/web/201...
"Tragically, most people are totally unaware that they are only a few weeks of discipline away from being able to comfortably maintain healthful dietary habits -- and to keep away from the products that can result in the destruction of their health."

It's not like anyone else can code a web browser or a search engine right? Maybe even a special search engine just for old HTTP sites? As time goes by, old search results are likely to be less accurate and not be rendered properly in modern browsers. Might as well use a correct tool for the job, like you would use DOSBox instead of Windows 10 command prompt to run old games.

I can actually read Japanese and your sources don't back up your story; they're just the superficial details we all know already.
Is he mentally unstable? Well I suppose everyone who commits murder is, by definition.
Was he really spamming in the English sense of the word? It's what some news sources say, but I cannot confirm.
Was he angry because he got reported or something related? Was he in fact angry as such at all? We are told little about his actual motivations.
He didn't get flamed, he just got the regular ‘o hai keyboard warrior’ type comment that's common on the internet.
In the following posts he says he's going to act in real life, but we cannot know at this point what he would have done if the discussion hadn't been there. He probably would have done exactly the same thing.
And it might have been opportune for him that the seminar was near his house, but let's not forget the actual connection between victim and suspect. He didn't stab just a random person.
Oh and before I forget: The link that you use to back up that the seminar was not really about resolving personal disputes on the internet is dead so we have to take your word for it. But the Wayback Machine has it and if you look at the actual contents you find that dealing with flames, grammar nazis, legal threats, unwanted confessions and all such crap was actually the main part of the seminar.

The FCC bans use of cellphones on aircraft, not the FAA. The Wikipedia article on the topic links out to a few other good sources.

This.

The big problem was from pilots in the early days, headphones have to be incredibly clear, which makes them very sensitive to EM interference. Basically as soon as you were airborne phones would start screaming for a tower (which transmit down, not up) and this translated into that annoying electronic beep/buzz that you used to get with your TV when your 90's Nokia went off.

Also they interfered with navigation system (pretty sure the announcements used to say "please switch of your mobile phone as it interferes with aircraft navigation systems" back in the day). Having to do course adjustments during the flight meant more time airborne. This may not matter to Freddy Facebookadict but I want to get to where I'm going reasonably on time.

The FCC bans use of cellphones on aircraft, not the FAA. The Wikipedia article on the topic links out to a few other good sources.

The suspect is a mentally unstable person who spent all day spamming comment sections of many blogs. The victim didn't really have an interaction with the murderer, he was just one of the victim of spam messages and reported him to admins. Suspect got flamed by some other commenter (not the victim) how internet warrior can't do anything in real life. After further taunting he decided to prove them wrong and randomly chose the victim because he happened to be holding a seminar near his house (the seminar wasn't really about 'how to resolve personal disputes on the internet' and more generally about dealing with multitude of problems in maintaining a blog).

The suspect is a mentally unstable person who spent all day spamming comment sections of many blogs. The victim didn't really have an interaction with the murderer, he was just one of the victim of spam messages and reported him to admins. Suspect got flamed by some other commenter (not the victim) how internet warrior can't do anything in real life. After further taunting he decided to prove them wrong and randomly chose the victim because he happened to be holding a seminar near his house (the seminar wasn't really about 'how to resolve personal disputes on the internet' and more generally about dealing with multitude of problems in maintaining a blog).

In a 1998 memo, they outlined their "action plan" for a campaign to cast doubt on climate science. Which they implemented pretty much as written.

The NYT didn't want me to know about their action plan: I got an error the first time I tried to load that page. Convenient archive.org link for anyone else it may happen to.

Citing inside climate news is like citing the daily mail.

There's any number of sites that have the memo on them. I cited those two because they have the actual scan of the memo on them, not merely the text file, and added the New York Times article, as a mainstream media source, but if you don't like those, I can send you a few dozen other links to the file. Or you could just google it.

By the way, everything you're accusing Exxon of is actually what a group of environmentalists and plaintiff's lawyers decided to do,

I gave a citation and links to three different sources. Where is yours?

Ah, you don't have a citation, you're making that up. Right. That's a trick right out of Göbbels, that "the cleverest trick used in propaganda" is to accuse your enemies of what you yourself are doing.

with funding by various Rockefeller foundations (among others). The main people that would benefit from this case being successful would be the class action attorneys, who would stand to make hundreds of millions if not billions.

Have you fully thought about the fact that the fossil fuel industry is a trillion dollar industry? Mere "hundreds of millions" is less than penny ante to them.

Who is more likely to fund a campaign, an industry that has a trillion dollars at stake, or some random collection of lawyers who say wait, maybe if we believe the science, some time in the far distant future some laws might or might not get written that might or might not allow a new grounds for lawsuit? Oh, wait, we know the answer to that, because we already have the American Petroleum Institute memo laying out their campaign and asking for 2 million dollars in funding... for the first year.

Yes, that's right-- the API considered this so important that they could ask fossil fuel companies to contribute a whopping 0.0002% of their cash flow to deal with it.

Citing inside climate news is like citing the daily mail.

There's any number of sites that have the memo on them. I cited those two because they have the actual scan of the memo on them, not merely the text file, and added the New York Times article, as a mainstream media source, but if you don't like those, I can send you a few dozen other links to the file. Or you could just google it.

By the way, everything you're accusing Exxon of is actually what a group of environmentalists and plaintiff's lawyers decided to do,

I gave a citation and links to three different sources. Where is yours?

Ah, you don't have a citation, you're making that up. Right. That's a trick right out of Göbbels, that "the cleverest trick used in propaganda" is to accuse your enemies of what you yourself are doing.

with funding by various Rockefeller foundations (among others). The main people that would benefit from this case being successful would be the class action attorneys, who would stand to make hundreds of millions if not billions.

Have you fully thought about the fact that the fossil fuel industry is a trillion dollar industry? Mere "hundreds of millions" is less than penny ante to them.

Who is more likely to fund a campaign, an industry that has a trillion dollars at stake, or some random collection of lawyers who say wait, maybe if we believe the science, some time in the far distant future some laws might or might not get written that might or might not allow a new grounds for lawsuit? Oh, wait, we know the answer to that, because we already have the American Petroleum Institute memo laying out their campaign and asking for 2 million dollars in funding... for the first year.

Yes, that's right-- the API considered this so important that they could ask fossil fuel companies to contribute a whopping 0.0002% of their cash flow to deal with it.

Recently John Oliver ran a piece on Venezuelan elections which was quite well debunked for being the US interest piece it was. Oliver has done comparable pieces serving American interests (some outright, some by silence) including his 2016 election coverage which never closely examined Hillary Clinton's campaign (there's not much there to like from an anti-war perspective when one gets into the details of her record) while dismissing the entirety of Dr. Jill Stein's campaign for one issue he disagreed with. Oliver had a segment on the sharp escalation of the drone war under Pres. Obama but covered in a way that doesn't criticize Obama much and lacks the drumbeat repetition that might educate Oliver's viewers on the horrors of extrajudicial assassination (including killing Americans and children). Circa 2016-02-28 Oliver got ironically worked up over then-candidate Trump for plainly stating what was Obama's policy after playing a clip of Trump calling into "Fox & Friends" where Trump said "...the other thing with the terrorists, you have to take out their families. When you get these terrorists, you have to take out their families. They care about their lives, don't kid yourself. They say they don't care about their lives, you have to take out their families.". Oliver replied "That is the front runner for the Republican nomination advocating a war crime." without pointing out that that's also precisely what Obama had already done and that killing people is objectively worse than ugly words. Oliver's drone segment was a one-off; easily missed if you didn't happen to catch the show or that segment, and not featuring catchphrases that pepper the show elsewhere (thus no risk of educating the audience about this to the point of raising a generation that would object to this war).

Noam Chomsky and Edward Herman's famous book "Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media" is well worth reading (and see the documentary based on this book) to understand the full extent of the famous Chomsky quote:

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum.

Modern news-based comedy shows contribute to that quite well with their carefully calibrated anti-Trumpism. With one notable exception (RT's "Redacted Tonight") all of those shows make fun of Trump in very comparable ways (looks-based derision such as his skin color, hair color, weight, the fit of his suits, etc.) and even draw on the same sources to tell them what constitutes news (largely whatever CNN says). But they don't dare give drumbeat coverage of critical issues that would seriously challenge American interests such as empire building, war, pointing out the continuity of policy across administrations, or the ugliness of capitalism.

So there's no real surprise in this turn of events. Censoring this particular story either comes from a lack of understanding of the Barbara Streisand effect or has roots in self-promotion. Issues that are eminently worth criticism remain firmly outside the range of allowable debate for corporate media.

This is a non-story.

Speaking of "stories," I do not understand why no one has yet mentioned Gordon Dickson's classic short "Computers Don't Argue" from 1965.

Magazine reproduction
Text version (but atrocious background color)

hey, Christmas Island gets it's own top level domain, why not this little flyspec too?

WebKit's HTML and JavaScript code was originally a fork of the KHTML and KJS libraries from KDE,
https://web.archive.org/web/20150209072938/http://lists.kde.org/?m=104197092318639

For his current thinking: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

After outlining the history of the creation of the Agile Manifesto, Dave Thomas outlines some basic problems with the Agile industry (including selling fear and also pushing complex IT systems to organize work that they can charge lots of money for). He says "the values have been totally lost behind the implementation". He says we need to distinguish between the implementation (Agile/Scrum/Lean/Kanban/etc) and the specification (Agility). He says "No rules are universal (except for this one)" and that "all rules are contextual". He espouses holding close to the value of "Agility" involving figuring out where you are, taking a small step towards your goal, re-evaluating and adjusting your understanding based on what you learned, and then iterating. He suggests choosing between alternatives delivering similar short-term value based on which keeps more options open to make future change easier -- outlining Dave's Rule of Design: "A good design is easier to change than a bad design." He calls for courage at the individual, team, and company levels to know you are going to make mistakes in order to find out what needs to be done -- and to work hard to make sure those mistakes small and correctable.

A shorter summary text version:
"Agile Is Dead (Long Live Agility)"
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
"The word "agile" has been subverted to the point where it is effectively meaningless, and what passes for an agile community seems to be largely an arena for consultants and vendors to hawk services and products. So I think it is time to retire the word "Agile."

I've collected more related ideas on this High Performance Organizations Reading List:
https://github.com/pdfernhout/...

The radiation exposure issue was well sorted during the Apollo missions and the dose clearly did not kill the astronauts within a period of decades. The trans-lunar trajectory was specifically designed to avoid spending significant time in the van Allen radiation zone. There was quite a detailed analysis available until late last year some time but now only in the archives: https://web.archive.org/web/20...

Apple own patents on AAC and thus pretty much does whatever they want with it

Advanced Audio Coding

AAC was developed with the cooperation and contributions of companies including AT&T Bell Laboratories, Fraunhofer IIS, Dolby Laboratories, Sony Corporation and Nokia. It was officially declared an international standard by the Moving Picture Experts Group in April 1997. It is specified both as Part 7 of the MPEG-2 standard, and Subpart 4 in Part 3 of the MPEG-4 standard.

FairPlay was done so the record labels would let Apple sell music, maybe you're thinking about that?

FairPlay was a digital rights management (DRM) technology developed by Apple Inc. It is built into the MP4 multimedia file format as an encrypted AAC audio layer, and is used by the company to protect copyrighted works sold through iTunes Store, allowing only authorized devices to play the content.

Apple didn't really want to use it, see Thoughts on Music, and was eventually able to convince the labels to drop the DRM requirement.

I got the idea from someone's Slashdot sig maybe around 2002 or so saying something like, "if it is intellectual property, shouldn't it be taxed"?
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net...

What is the social justification for such a tax?

Real property taxes are justified by the notion that real estate imposes a cost on society -- for fire departments, police departments, schools, roads, sewers, water pipelines, libraries, town courts, property record archives, and so forth.

Copyrights were originally monopolies granted "for a limited time" with the notion that the costs they imposed on society would be repaid by the work moving into the public domain after that limited time. That bargain has effectively been broken because the terms are so long (and likely will be in perpetuity in the U.S.A. given the recent Supreme Court decision). Yet, copyrights still pose a cost on society. There must be courts to dispute them, police to enforce them. There must be prisons to hold the millions of copyright offenders. Like no one in the 1960s would imagine a million U.S. citizens behind bars for non-violent drug offenses in the 1990s, it is possible that there may be a million U.S. citizens behind bars in the 2010s for copyright violations as the "War on Those Who Share" gets underway. There must be an information superhighway to transport these works, and standards for disseminating them. Authors of derivative works must spend time researching whether a work is already in the public domain, or locating all the related rights holders if it is not. Extensions of the principle of copyright to cover the ideas in the work such as characters or plot lines or other structures make it ever more costly to create new non-infringing works. Many new or derived works are not created because of these chilling effects, which is a hidden cost of copyrights. People in developing nations or others who cannot pay use fees for copyrighted works are deprived of education or enjoyment when such a deprivation does not directly benefit anyone. So, given all these indirect costs of granting copyright monopolies, society is justified in imposing a financial cost on copyright holders to rebalance the copyright bargain.

Real estate is typically taxed at a small percentage of an assessed value. If the taxes are not paid, the real estate essentially becomes owned by society. Note that these annual property taxes are in addition to any fees for recording deed transfers, liens, title searches, and such.

Since it is difficult to value a copyright, one possibility to determine the value of a copyright is to let copyright holders assess themselves how much it is worth it to them to keep their work out of the public domain. Then the rights holder would pay annually a small percentage of this value (perhaps three to five percent). Each year, when the rights holder sent in their tax, the rights holder could change this self-assessed value to reflect their changing priorities and a changing market. If the rights holder did not pay the tax, then the work would move immediately into the public domain. If someone wanted that work in the public domain, they could pay the copyright holder the self-assessed amount and the work would then immediately be moved into the public domain. This public domain buyout possibility serves to limit the tendency of rights holders to produce low self-assessments to minimize their annual tax payments.

This approach could include a digital archive of all copyrighted works. Essentially, upon initial registration of a self-assessed value, a rights holder would be required to send in a digital copy of the work. This copy would be used to determine rights holders for works by means of a digital search. Any work not in this database would be presumed public domain. If the annual tax were not paid, th

Then:*

Mozilla's mission is to promote openness, innovation, and opportunity on the web. We do this by creating great software, like the Firefox browser, and building movements, like Drumbeat, that give people tools to take control of their online lives.

Now:

Our mission is to ensure the Internet is a global public resource, open and accessible to all. An Internet that truly puts people first, where individuals can shape their own experience and are empowered, safe and independent.

The past focused on software. The present focuses on... the Mozilla Foundation?

*Actually, the meandering mission statement in the very beginning (1999) was this and it stayed pretty much the same (save for some minor edits) for a decade or so.

Then:*

Mozilla's mission is to promote openness, innovation, and opportunity on the web. We do this by creating great software, like the Firefox browser, and building movements, like Drumbeat, that give people tools to take control of their online lives.

Now:

Our mission is to ensure the Internet is a global public resource, open and accessible to all. An Internet that truly puts people first, where individuals can shape their own experience and are empowered, safe and independent.

The past focused on software. The present focuses on... the Mozilla Foundation?

*Actually, the meandering mission statement in the very beginning (1999) was this and it stayed pretty much the same (save for some minor edits) for a decade or so.

That doesn't sound right, but I don't know enough about the Civil War to dispute it.

Na, just kidding.

South Carolina

A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction. This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.

Mississippi

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin

Louisiana

As a separate republic, Louisiana remembers too well the whisperings of European diplomacy for the abolition of slavery in the times of annexation not to be apprehensive of bolder demonstrations from the same quarter and the North in this country. The people of the slave holding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery.

Alabama

Upon the principles then announced by Mr. Lincoln and his leading friends, we are bound to expect his administration to be conducted. Hence it is, that in high places, among the Republican party, the election of Mr. Lincoln is hailed, not simply as it change of Administration, but as the inauguration of new principles, and a new theory of Government, and even as the downfall of slavery. Therefore it is that the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than a solemn declaration, on the part of a great majority of the Northern people, of hostility to the South, her property and her institutions—nothing less than an open declaration of war—for the triumph of this new theory of Government destroys the property of the South, lays waste her fields, and inaugurates all the horrors of a San Domingo servile insurrection, consigning her citizens to assassinations, and. her wives and daughters to pollution and violation, to gratify the lust of half-civilized

That doesn't sound right, but I don't know enough about the Civil War to dispute it.

Na, just kidding.

South Carolina

A geographical line has been drawn across the Union, and all the States north of that line have united in the election of a man to the high office of President of the United States, whose opinions and purposes are hostile to slavery. He is to be entrusted with the administration of the common Government, because he has declared that that “Government cannot endure permanently half slave, half free,” and that the public mind must rest in the belief that slavery is in the course of ultimate extinction. This sectional combination for the submersion of the Constitution, has been aided in some of the States by elevating to citizenship, persons who, by the supreme law of the land, are incapable of becoming citizens; and their votes have been used to inaugurate a new policy, hostile to the South, and destructive of its beliefs and safety.

Mississippi

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery—the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin

Louisiana

As a separate republic, Louisiana remembers too well the whisperings of European diplomacy for the abolition of slavery in the times of annexation not to be apprehensive of bolder demonstrations from the same quarter and the North in this country. The people of the slave holding States are bound together by the same necessity and determination to preserve African slavery.

Alabama

Upon the principles then announced by Mr. Lincoln and his leading friends, we are bound to expect his administration to be conducted. Hence it is, that in high places, among the Republican party, the election of Mr. Lincoln is hailed, not simply as it change of Administration, but as the inauguration of new principles, and a new theory of Government, and even as the downfall of slavery. Therefore it is that the election of Mr. Lincoln cannot be regarded otherwise than a solemn declaration, on the part of a great majority of the Northern people, of hostility to the South, her property and her institutions—nothing less than an open declaration of war—for the triumph of this new theory of Government destroys the property of the South, lays waste her fields, and inaugurates all the horrors of a San Domingo servile insurrection, consigning her citizens to assassinations, and. her wives and daughters to pollution and violation, to gratify the lust of half-civilized

Hashing is trivial. The method being used by FB is not simple hashes, and it's Microsoft's proprietary tech. It's also used for keeping one step ahead of kiddie pornographers.

No it doesn't. The second post on the page you linked to has a link to a blog post about why the Wayback Machine has stopped obeying robots.txt.

And then they stopped obeying it: https://blog.archive.org/2017/04/17/robots-txt-meant-for-search-engines-dont-work-well-for-web-archives/

Which is bad and will lead to countermeasures from an increasing number of people. I for one intend my web sites to be a transient form of communication. I don't care if you personally make a copy for yourself, but the pages are not for someone who didn't read them when they were published. I absolutely do not want to fuel any stalking, mild or threatening. I am not a politician, celebrity or other person of interest. I stopped posting to Usenet when DejaNews showed up with an archive from times long before people were aware that their every comment would be archived. If these militant archivists don't honor explicit requests to not have a site archived, then they will destroy the public web. Everything will go the Facebook way: Hidden behind logins and access control lists.

See https://archive.org/about/faqs...
If you want to delete your site from the wayback machine, all you have to do is ask them. They are not obligated to keep any page in the archive, whether it contains "evidence" or not. You can also exclude ia_archiver user agent in your robots.txt, which will prevent your site from being indexed in the first place. This way you will not even have to ask them.

The Wayback Machine obeys robots.txt, even retroactively. If a site puts up a robots.txt file, archive.org will remove old versions of the site.

My point was P(pickup), not P(found). But you knew that.

If you really want to challenge my argument, instead of a strawman you should challenge me to provide citations of this (and similar) douchey behavior happening prior to the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order. If you did that, I would list:

* Major ISPs throttling Netflix, et al.
* Verizon stating on-record that they would like to charge services for better access to their subscribers
* Madison River (ISP) blocking vonage
* Comcast (ISP) blocking P2P applications
* Telus (ISP) blocking access to a website critical of them
* Shaw (ISP) charging a 'QoS fee' to subscribers using competing VoIP solutions
* AT&T blocking VoIP apps on the iPhone
* AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon blocking Google Wallet
* Verizon blocking tethering apps
* AT&T charging extra if iPhone users want to use facetime, instead of AT&T's competing product

No one would put up with a power company that charged more for electricity to power appliances that weren't also bought from them. And yet, when a company that is a combination of ISP and content provider decides to trollishly increase the cost of competitive content streaming, somehow that's OK? SMH.

You ended with a point about opening up more spectrum & increasing service (which I take to mean that the former would cause the latter.) I can't personally speak to the matter of opening up more spectrum, because I don't know how much spectrum sits fallow. I would be surprised if much did.

My point was P(pickup), not P(found). But you knew that.

If you really want to challenge my argument, instead of a strawman you should challenge me to provide citations of this (and similar) douchey behavior happening prior to the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order. If you did that, I would list:

* Major ISPs throttling Netflix, et al.
* Verizon stating on-record that they would like to charge services for better access to their subscribers
* Madison River (ISP) blocking vonage
* Comcast (ISP) blocking P2P applications
* Telus (ISP) blocking access to a website critical of them
* Shaw (ISP) charging a 'QoS fee' to subscribers using competing VoIP solutions
* AT&T blocking VoIP apps on the iPhone
* AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon blocking Google Wallet
* Verizon blocking tethering apps
* AT&T charging extra if iPhone users want to use facetime, instead of AT&T's competing product

No one would put up with a power company that charged more for electricity to power appliances that weren't also bought from them. And yet, when a company that is a combination of ISP and content provider decides to trollishly increase the cost of competitive content streaming, somehow that's OK? SMH.

You ended with a point about opening up more spectrum & increasing service (which I take to mean that the former would cause the latter.) I can't personally speak to the matter of opening up more spectrum, because I don't know how much spectrum sits fallow. I would be surprised if much did.

My point was P(pickup), not P(found). But you knew that.

If you really want to challenge my argument, instead of a strawman you should challenge me to provide citations of this (and similar) douchey behavior happening prior to the FCC's 2015 Open Internet Order. If you did that, I would list:

* Major ISPs throttling Netflix, et al.
* Verizon stating on-record that they would like to charge services for better access to their subscribers
* Madison River (ISP) blocking vonage
* Comcast (ISP) blocking P2P applications
* Telus (ISP) blocking access to a website critical of them
* Shaw (ISP) charging a 'QoS fee' to subscribers using competing VoIP solutions
* AT&T blocking VoIP apps on the iPhone
* AT&T, Sprint, and Verizon blocking Google Wallet
* Verizon blocking tethering apps
* AT&T charging extra if iPhone users want to use facetime, instead of AT&T's competing product

No one would put up with a power company that charged more for electricity to power appliances that weren't also bought from them. And yet, when a company that is a combination of ISP and content provider decides to trollishly increase the cost of competitive content streaming, somehow that's OK? SMH.

You ended with a point about opening up more spectrum & increasing service (which I take to mean that the former would cause the latter.) I can't personally speak to the matter of opening up more spectrum, because I don't know how much spectrum sits fallow. I would be surprised if much did.

It's about time. People like MDs. Joel Fuhrman, Dean Ornish, John McDougall, Mark Hyman, and also Douglas Lisle, Ph.D. and Alan Goldhamer , D.C. have been saying this for decades. It's just crazy that health insurance or Medicare will pay $50K for a heart operation but won;t help people eat right to avoid the operation.

For example: https://www.drfuhrman.com/libr...
"CVD is ultimately caused by oxidative stress and inflammation that leads to damaged arteries. With an intake of low nutrient, pro-inflammatory foods high in saturated and trans fat, as well as refined carbohydrates, cholesterol plaques begin to line the inner endothelial layer of the arteries. Other elements of excessive animal product intake also contribute, such as the iron and carnitine in meat and too much animal protein in general. These growing plaques can block the arteries and even rupture and promote a clot, causing rapid occlusion of the vessels. The same disease-promoting diet most Americans consume results in high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, insulin resistance, and obesity, all of which further contribute to an inflammatory environment that promotes atherosclerosis. Tobacco use, stress, sedentary lifestyle, poor sleep quality, and certain medications also increase risk of CVD. A Nutritarian diet, exercise, and tobacco cessation can remove plaque and reverse or eliminate the risk of CVD, as it has done in thousands of those following a Nutritarian diet worldwide."

Another aspect of this is resetting taste preferences to escape the pleasure trap of supernormal stimuli:
http://web.archive.org/web/201...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

This also shows how interwoven healthcare is with all other aspects of our society like culture and easy availability of healthy foods and other aspects of healthy like moderate exercise.. BlueZones addresses some of that bigger picture: https://www.bluezones.com/

How it used to be: http://web.archive.org/web/199... Not much political articles there.

So, your comment got me wondering when the typewriter was invented. Turns out it was 1868. That's about 400 years after the printing press, so there's a lot of history to look at from *before* the typewriter existed.

And here's an article that does just that:
https://web.archive.org/web/20...

I agree with this guy. It's an aesthetic preference, so there's no right or wrong answer. I tend to prefer additional space after the end of a sentence, because it more easily allows me to see the logical break that should be represented by that sentence end. Since computers and displays today are capable of micro-adjustments to character spacing, and they also can tell where sentences end (unlike a typewriter), it's irrelevant how many spaces there are after a period in the source - the text can be (or should be able to be) displayed with my preferred spacing.

There is no strong indication that it was significantly higher before then.

No strong indication?

Here's an article from 2015 that mentions Michael O'Reilly:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150224022942/http://www.cnet.com/news/sorry-your-broadband-internet-technically-isnt-broadband-anymore/

Just like how Obama approved Ajit "pile of shit" Pai.

by John Taylor Gatto: https://archive.org/details/Th...

From the summary:

John Taylor Gatto is a former New York public schoolteacher who taught for thirty years and won multiple awards for his teaching. However, constant harassment by unhelpful administrations plus his own frustrations with what he came to realize were the inherent systemic deficiencies of our `public' schools led him to resign; he now is a school-choice activist who writes and speaks against our compulsory, government-run school system.

THE UNDERGROUND HISTORY OF AMERICAN EDUCATION is a freewheeling investigation into the real - as opposed to the `official' - history of schooling, focused on the U.S. but with examinations of other historical examples for the purposes of comparing and contrasting, as well as for tracing where ideas and concepts related to education originated. You will discover things you were never told in the official version, things that will, at times, surprise, disgust, and scare you. You will also be introduced to the little-known historiography of the the darker side of the construction of compulsory government schooling.

In the final analysis, Gatto believes that compulsory, government-run schooling is inherently destructive to true education, the cultivation of self-reliance, and indeed to individualism - which used to be a defining element of the American character. The true purpose of our public school system in reality has more to do with control than it does with learning. This does not mean that rank-and-file teachers, principals, and even superintendents believe they are making students dumber, more conformist, less self-reliant, less capable of genuine analytical, independent thought, and more easily controlled; most people involved in the system no doubt believe that they are trying their best to really teach their students. However, the system itself (which Gatto often characterizes as a complex web) ensures that its real purpose is served, despite the efforts of individual reformers within it - that true democracy is rendered unworkable even as the trappings of democracy are allegedly bolstered. Seen in this light, these institutions that produce barely literate, dependent, conformist, incomplete individuals full of emotional and psychological problems, who lack real knowledge (and whose capacity for acquiring such is deliberately weakened or eliminated), and who are just `educated' enough to pay their taxes and buy the latest products, are not, in fact, failing schools - on the contrary, if we are to believe Gatto's analysis, they are performing their designated function PERFECTLY. That purpose is to mold people in such a way as to make them more easily controlled by corporations and the state (a clear-cut example of how, contrary to popular myth, the interests of big business and those of big government more often than not coincide.)

Though the organization of the book is somewhat haphazard, this book is compulsively readable to any critical thinker with an open mind to consider what's REALLY wrong with our school system (and, no, it's nothing so simple as a shortage of funds or a lack of `accountability' -- the real problems are deeper, philosophical, and systemic.) The book is absolutely riveting, and the country would be better off if more citizens read it and demanded real change to the system.

Gatto's book deserves five stars because it dares to speak the truth.

Wayback Machine confirms the site was pretty much a tourism / travel agency site for France. https://web.archive.org/web/20...

Buy-to-fly ratio:
https://www.wired.com/2012/10/...

"And your material loss is maybe 10 percent, just for trimming the edges. Instead of a ratio of purchased to flown material-what they call the 'buy to fly' ratio-of maybe 10 to 20, you have a ratio of 1.1, 1.2 tops."

A practical example is in this video.
https://archive.org/details/NA...

This is the backshell for the Orion spacecraft. It's machined from a /single piece/ of metal 17 feet square. >95% of it gets machined away.

A reasonably skeptical person would say "but that's just the backshell. It has to be {strong, lightweight, seamless, etc}. In this picture you can see many other structural panels manufactured the same way.

https://blogs.nasa.gov/orion/w...

If, and it is a non-trivial if, they manage to pull 10 flights out of a Block 5 booster without refurbishment that's another order of magnitude.

If you've got 20 minutes, check out this video from Moscow in 1940 showing attempts to keep severed dog heads alive. Even J B S Haldane makes an appearance.

Does the gazebo have an arrow stuck in it?

There is no "two side" of the coins for some stuff

That's true. For some stuff. But "climate science" is not part of it. Or, maybe, it is — and we simply ought to apply tar-and-feathers to the quacks professing to be "climate scientists".

they are free to present peer reviewed article showing climate science wrong

All of the "peers" you are talking about are drawing their salaries from the governments. US alone spends four times more on "climate research" today, than we did in 1993.

Even if one of these guys does have the results you want, no peer will vouch for it, because such results will mean, 75% of them will need to look for new jobs. It is called conflict of interest — and it works the same way, whether the study's subject is "is pasta good for you" or "do we need to ban farting".

No, for it to be accepted as valid science, a discipline needs to not only explain the past, but also predict the future. Internet is full of failed predictions by these people (my personal favorite), but there aren't any successful ones...

Are you aware of any? Please, post pairs of links: one link in each pair going to a meaningful prediction, another — to it coming true (within, say, 20% of the predicted value, if quantifiable). To qualify, the linked-to articles must be a few years apart from each other.

Would you accept somebody denigrating vaccination [...] the same to climate science

Wow... So, medicine and climate are disciplines in the same standing with you? One could be more wrong than you are, but it is difficult...

What if I told you, "climate science" is not even falsifiable — by the some practitioners' own admissions?

Websites from the 90s display just fine in modern browsers, you can find many such examples on web.archive.org.

Here you can see yahoo.com from 1996:
https://web.archive.org/web/19...
And a version of netscape.com from 1996:
https://web.archive.org/web/19...

Websites designed specifically for IE may not display specifically because they violated the open HTML specs and did their own proprietary crap, which is exactly the problem the previous poster was complaining about.

Websites from the 90s display just fine in modern browsers, you can find many such examples on web.archive.org.

Here you can see yahoo.com from 1996:
https://web.archive.org/web/19...
And a version of netscape.com from 1996:
https://web.archive.org/web/19...

Websites designed specifically for IE may not display specifically because they violated the open HTML specs and did their own proprietary crap, which is exactly the problem the previous poster was complaining about.

Insert Knob A in Hole B

Direct link, in case you want to read the one-page story unspoiled.

"The Corporation" features Robert Hare's analysis of corporation as psychopath. RMS is likely referring to this when he said:

Q: As somebody who's had your set of experiences and expertise, I'm curious: Do you feel like you've had any experiences that lend particular insight into how these companies work?

A: They're corporations. Corporations have been compared to psychopaths.

The Corporation is an excellent documentary. I highly recommend the 2-disc DVD set and the additional features and alternate audio tracks. There are other copies on archive.org too. And I see the same team is now working on a sequel.

https://web.archive.org/web/20...

"To some, this transparency is intrinsic to UNIX, but it also comes from a greater familiarity among system administrators with its internal workings."

Unix and Linux administrators usually have a greater familiarity with how things work. Windows admins are usually just smart enough to answer a simple yes/no question and then click 'next'.

"Windows operations still involves too many reboots. Sometimes they are unnecessary, but operators reboot a system rather than take the time to debug it. For example, a service may be hung, and rather than take the time to find and fix the problem, it is often more convenient to reboot. By contrast, UNIX administrators are conditioned to quickly identify the failing service and simply restart it; they are helped in this by the greater transparency of UNIX and the small number of interdependencies."

Windows users are trained to press the reset button. Linux and Unix users are trained to identify the problem, find a solution, and implement a fix.