Slashdot Mirror

I wrote a quick thing on it here: http://zoobster.blogspot.com/ and on hiveminds: http://www.hiveminds.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=468 18 MS has their object documented (wherein the property of .responseText shows its forced UTF8), but I've discovered that its the same for every browser (FF, Opera, etc). The only browser who supports the correct code-paging for the .responseText is Apple Safari. If you maintain the charset in the XML document you retrieve with .responeXML (say shift-jis or whichever) - then the .responseXML object behaves accordingly and you can render non-UTF8 data. It was frustrating as heck to try and retrieve shift-jis with .responseText (declaring it in setHeaders, the page calling was shift-jis, and the page requested was shift-jis - but it all came up as utf-8, garbled). I lucked out finding that the .responseXML respects the codepage. These days, I just use .responseXML exclusively, just to avoid that headache. Sure, sometimes when you do a callback - all you want is something small - say, "3" - and .responseXML requires valid XML (read: extra crap/elements wrapped around just to get a "3"), but it protects me from ever having to retrieve data that is of a different codepage.

If media provided by sites like Freesound matter to you then please take a look at this. CC could really use our collective help right now, it appears that their non-profit status could be in jeopardy...

http://thriftyboutique.blogspot.com/2005_11_01_thr iftyboutique_archive.html#113089043544507719 (lots of images)

this reminds me of "Sound of the Day".

archives go back to Dec 2004. (wrt to geotagged freesounds it wouldn't be much but that's still +~365...and it's interesting)

this reminds me of "Sound of the Day".

archives go back to Dec 2004. (wrt to geotagged freesounds it wouldn't be much but that's still +~365...and it's interesting)

Short answer: it depends. Our Group Product Manager, Prashant, has some comments on this on a weblog: The bottom line is that pricing is VERY much tied to your individual circumstances. We're much more transparent than other tools vendors, but at the end of the day, the volume in which you do or do not buy, the fact that you may or may not be an ISV, the fact that you may or may not be a SI/consultant/partner, or any number of other circumstances can substantially alter how much you pay for the SKUs. Only a very, very small number of people pay our full retail price for the high end product.

I'm not trying to troll, flame or be a dick here, but the GIMP generated images you have on display in your blog are exactly the kind of primitive, could-have-been-done-on-MS-Paint stuff that makes The GIMP look like a joke.

Happy birthday to GIMP, the "King Pimp" of graphics software. Without this powerful, free, open-source image editor, I couldn't have created the graphics for my blog: http://sunandfun.blogspot.com/2005/04/in-praise-of -gimp.html

It would compliment the emerging desktop fabricators quite nicely.

Imagine the new "Do It Yourself opportunities.

It would compliment the emerging desktop fabricators quite nicely.

Imagine the new "Do It Yourself opportunities.

Its a shame both sides are filled with rabid anti-reason ideologues. See here for a more reasonable opinion.

http://freeipodforall.blogspot.com/

And I actually got a response from Jaffe ...

http://superrob.blogspot.com/2005/11/david-jaffes- plea-to-game-journalist.html

KAR 120C

There does seem to be a large amount of dissension over what novels should be on this top 20 lits so i must as what books would you personally put on a top list, mine are over at my blog http://rogueleadzer0.blogspot.com/2005/11/geek-boo ks.html what about the rest of you geeks out there(i know you want to say)

Sign me up, too.

Read Mark Lukovsky's first blog entry after his move from Microsoft to Google. He opposes the notion that "Microsoft knows how to ship software" and compares the "Microsoft method" (bug fix, test, beta, rc, RTM, customers test, customers deploy) versus the "Amazon method" (bug fix, test, deploy to web server, customers pick it up automatically).

We live in interesting times.

I'd never heard of Greg Egan until now. As your taste includes the sensational Ken MacLeod, I'll definitely make a point of reading Egan's stuff.

MacLeod's early work, The Fall Revolution is simply the best Sci Fi I've ever read. Near future (at least in the beginning) dystopian sci-fi that extrapolates current social, technological and geo-political trends in an incisive manner. Want Unix shell commands in the fiction you read? Dreading the breakdown of the social fabric due to the inevitable result of rampant capitalism? Ready to take up arms to resist American hegemony? MacLeod is the author for you.

In its Cold War with Microsoft, Google is readying a new weapon: The Google Strategic Server Force (GSSF). This new elite mobile strike force is emerging as a main component in Google's strategic arsenal. The Government reports that Google is readying the first deployment of the G-36M series mobile data centers and predicts that they will be online in time for Santa.

More on this breaking news story here.

I saw a writeup at:http://mjpaci.blogspot.com/2005/11/music-on-my- cell-phone-or-how-to-give.html along with moronic commentart.

Slightly OT, but I've seen these petaboxes at a colo in SF - I believe they were being used for archive.org. The "Petabox" looks more like a more refined and professional version of Google's early, early, prototype corkboards. Google has these corkboard racks on display in the visitor's lobby of the google headquarters, along with another one being stored at the san jose computer history museum. They were google's first generation of servers, so today's solutions, I'd imagine, would be more elaborate, efficient, and finished - closer to the petabox.

You can see a picture of the corkboard racks on the google blog here: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2004/07/racking-up- honor.html

The petabox looks like it is just a rack full of 1U servers, wired cleverly and efficiently. But stick racks of these into a tiny shipping container as a "prototype datacenter", and I'm sure all these guys would overheat.

Sometimes you have to wonder why any decent attractive woman in her right mind would ever create a profile on one of those things.

I am not a Match.com employee. In fact, I know nothing about the company.

But two and a half years ago, I met a girl on it. We chatted, dated, and now are engaged to be married. She is geeky enough to design web-sites and have her own blog. Yet she is also intelligent, funny, and - dare I say it - drop dead gorgeous.

Perhaps you should ask her why she signed up?

I wrote something just a few days ago about how the music industry should not only concentrate on fighting piracy, but also give something back to their loyal customers. It seems that just like lawyers know nothing about technology (or cows know little about algebra), music companies know very little about using the power of the internet for good causes. Maybe now they'll learn.

Hmph, anyway, when Firefox can interpret and render a page in Lisp, I'll switch.

There was a Google Summer of Code project at Lisp NYC called FireLisp that would be just that. Didn't seem to get worked on though :( Theres a mention here.

I've made sites with fairly mainstream content before, which were totally ignored by google. But then, I put an article on my blog about the history of a certain group of elite English schools in Taiwan. Previously, this information had not been on the internet anywhere. Now, if you type the name of the original school of that group (Modawei) into google, my article comes up #1.

I've made sites with fairly mainstream content before, which were totally ignored by google. But then, I put an article on my blog about the history of a certain group of elite English schools in Taiwan. Previously, this information had not been on the internet anywhere. Now, if you type the name of the original school of that group (Modawei) into google, my article comes up #1.

The iPod WITHOUT a iTunesMusicStore wouldn't be WORTH any more than any other player. It couldn't COST any more either.

Apple is able to command the prices it changes for the iPod because the entire package is actually worth it.

Also, with the podcasting revolution, content is becoming available from unusual sources for unusual uses, not just ditties. (One person's music is just another person's noise.)

----

I was using a wiki for all my ideas and getting no traction. Nobody cares about software development, or so it seemed. Also its hard to index the content of my database, no?

So I've shifted media and I've started blogging and podcasting, and I'm about to start vodcasting, (vod = video on demand,) though what I've been able to achieve with just pictures using PodcastAV is pretty impressive.)

Thinking up stuff and writing on a wiki is one thing but getting the blog out there (for the real information) and a podcast out there (for clarification and additional information,) and promoting it through iTunes is the bending end.

I recommend http://screencastsonline.com/ for great instructional info. It is really inspirational too.

I found out everything I actually needed to know about RSS feeds, podcast production, distribution and promotion through iTunesMusicStore.

I'm going to blow my own horn. :-)

I am now officially OiRc (Objects, instances; Relationships, connections) on http://oirc.blogspot.com/ http://oirc.libsyn.com/ and the OiRc Podcast on the iTunesMusicStore.

And now that the tests have all worked, I'm going to record 'casts for all the episodes.

----

From a McLuhanistic point of view, this medium is fantastic.

Its both cold, as print and sitting passively consuming movies in a theater was/is, and hot as television was supposed to be, with community TV I guess.

But with narrow casting of the information I want to share, but only with the individuals who can act on it, leaving the rest of the world blissfully unaware, I believe that podcasting is a real revolution in the media.

The barrier to entry has falled from multi-million dollar studios and specialized staff down to my Macintoshes and my ideas.

No I am not going to change the world.

No I'm not going to become rich and famous (through I can hope for some recognition.)

But if some people in the world of software development can at least hear and take notice of my ideas, even if they tell me I'm full of shit (I know I'm not,) I'll be satisfied.

The end of this "Big Brother" attitude from controlled media is written upon the wall (but not in the papers). The digitally connected masses will soon remove the mass from media. Here's why:

1. The balance of power has already shifted to the masses in a sort of first mover advantage. The backlash coming from the entertainment industry is reflexive. It happens *after* networked mobs creatively, unexpectedly, disruptively take technology into their own hands. The tension between the entertainment industry and the online world simply represents that shift of power and control away from mass media.

2. What will the entertainment industry be when consumers en masse, produce their own "as good or better than" diversions? Blogs spontaneously exploded news into millions of niches, leaching the mass from news media. Cheap high tech multimedia production tools wielded by thousands of grass roots reporters are absolutely capable of producing high quality fare.

The mass entertainment and news industry will soon compete with high quality virtually free grass roots alternatives from the digitally connected masses, and take its rightful place as another niche. What "mass" will be left to market to?

3. Litigation takes a lot of time. Since technological advances also accelerate events, inflexible, knee jerk systems will eventually be overwhelmed with the speed of disruption. There will soon not be enough time to react before the next volley. Future shock paralyses the most inflexible systems first. So, ultimately, in a digitally networked world, control is distributed to the masses. But the question keeps returning:
Is Big Brother a Possible Future?Will some central organization, representing narrow interests be able to control what citizens share electronically? I don't think so. The imminent emergence of open source personal self-replicating fabricators will spit out an ever growing complexity of items, all of which will be embedded with personalized computational intelligence. So, no consistent control over hardware standards will be possible. Chips will not answer to a centralized institution.

As self-replicating fabricators rapidly spread to thousands and then millions of people, they will mutate and evolve; enlisted to upgrade and propagate their own next generation. Mobjects from the collective creative energy of Smart Mobs. This spells the end of the consumer/ producer divide. What will mass marketing be without a mass market?

The end of this "Big Brother" attitude from controlled media is written upon the wall (but not in the papers). The digitally connected masses will soon remove the mass from media. Here's why:

1. The balance of power has already shifted to the masses in a sort of first mover advantage. The backlash coming from the entertainment industry is reflexive. It happens *after* networked mobs creatively, unexpectedly, disruptively take technology into their own hands. The tension between the entertainment industry and the online world simply represents that shift of power and control away from mass media.

2. What will the entertainment industry be when consumers en masse, produce their own "as good or better than" diversions? Blogs spontaneously exploded news into millions of niches, leaching the mass from news media. Cheap high tech multimedia production tools wielded by thousands of grass roots reporters are absolutely capable of producing high quality fare.

The mass entertainment and news industry will soon compete with high quality virtually free grass roots alternatives from the digitally connected masses, and take its rightful place as another niche. What "mass" will be left to market to?

3. Litigation takes a lot of time. Since technological advances also accelerate events, inflexible, knee jerk systems will eventually be overwhelmed with the speed of disruption. There will soon not be enough time to react before the next volley. Future shock paralyses the most inflexible systems first. So, ultimately, in a digitally networked world, control is distributed to the masses. But the question keeps returning:
Is Big Brother a Possible Future?Will some central organization, representing narrow interests be able to control what citizens share electronically? I don't think so. The imminent emergence of open source personal self-replicating fabricators will spit out an ever growing complexity of items, all of which will be embedded with personalized computational intelligence. So, no consistent control over hardware standards will be possible. Chips will not answer to a centralized institution.

As self-replicating fabricators rapidly spread to thousands and then millions of people, they will mutate and evolve; enlisted to upgrade and propagate their own next generation. Mobjects from the collective creative energy of Smart Mobs. This spells the end of the consumer/ producer divide. What will mass marketing be without a mass market?

The end of this "Big Brother" attitude from controlled media is written upon the wall (but not in the papers). The digitally connected masses will soon remove the mass from media. Here's why:

1. The balance of power has already shifted to the masses in a sort of first mover advantage. The backlash coming from the entertainment industry is reflexive. It happens *after* networked mobs creatively, unexpectedly, disruptively take technology into their own hands. The tension between the entertainment industry and the online world simply represents that shift of power and control away from mass media.

2. What will the entertainment industry be when consumers en masse, produce their own "as good or better than" diversions? Blogs spontaneously exploded news into millions of niches, leaching the mass from news media. Cheap high tech multimedia production tools wielded by thousands of grass roots reporters are absolutely capable of producing high quality fare.

The mass entertainment and news industry will soon compete with high quality virtually free grass roots alternatives from the digitally connected masses, and take its rightful place as another niche. What "mass" will be left to market to?

3. Litigation takes a lot of time. Since technological advances also accelerate events, inflexible, knee jerk systems will eventually be overwhelmed with the speed of disruption. There will soon not be enough time to react before the next volley. Future shock paralyses the most inflexible systems first. So, ultimately, in a digitally networked world, control is distributed to the masses. But the question keeps returning:
Is Big Brother a Possible Future?Will some central organization, representing narrow interests be able to control what citizens share electronically? I don't think so. The imminent emergence of open source personal self-replicating fabricators will spit out an ever growing complexity of items, all of which will be embedded with personalized computational intelligence. So, no consistent control over hardware standards will be possible. Chips will not answer to a centralized institution.

As self-replicating fabricators rapidly spread to thousands and then millions of people, they will mutate and evolve; enlisted to upgrade and propagate their own next generation. Mobjects from the collective creative energy of Smart Mobs. This spells the end of the consumer/ producer divide. What will mass marketing be without a mass market?

The end of this "Big Brother" attitude from controlled media is written upon the wall (but not in the papers). The digitally connected masses will soon remove the mass from media. Here's why:

1. The balance of power has already shifted to the masses in a sort of first mover advantage. The backlash coming from the entertainment industry is reflexive. It happens *after* networked mobs creatively, unexpectedly, disruptively take technology into their own hands. The tension between the entertainment industry and the online world simply represents that shift of power and control away from mass media.

2. What will the entertainment industry be when consumers en masse, produce their own "as good or better than" diversions? Blogs spontaneously exploded news into millions of niches, leaching the mass from news media. Cheap high tech multimedia production tools wielded by thousands of grass roots reporters are absolutely capable of producing high quality fare.

The mass entertainment and news industry will soon compete with high quality virtually free grass roots alternatives from the digitally connected masses, and take its rightful place as another niche. What "mass" will be left to market to?

3. Litigation takes a lot of time. Since technological advances also accelerate events, inflexible, knee jerk systems will eventually be overwhelmed with the speed of disruption. There will soon not be enough time to react before the next volley. Future shock paralyses the most inflexible systems first. So, ultimately, in a digitally networked world, control is distributed to the masses. But the question keeps returning:
Is Big Brother a Possible Future?Will some central organization, representing narrow interests be able to control what citizens share electronically? I don't think so. The imminent emergence of open source personal self-replicating fabricators will spit out an ever growing complexity of items, all of which will be embedded with personalized computational intelligence. So, no consistent control over hardware standards will be possible. Chips will not answer to a centralized institution.

As self-replicating fabricators rapidly spread to thousands and then millions of people, they will mutate and evolve; enlisted to upgrade and propagate their own next generation. Mobjects from the collective creative energy of Smart Mobs. This spells the end of the consumer/ producer divide. What will mass marketing be without a mass market?

...head on over to the Dump Rogers Day blog. It was setup in response to this action.

Actually yelling Fire! is the classic counter-example.
It is free speech to yell Fire!
The expression comes from a 1919 case, schenk v united states http://laws.findlaw.com/us/249/47.html
in which some guys were put in jail for passing out leaflets opposing the war and suggesting that the draft was involuntary servitude and thus unconstitutional under the 13th Amendment.
The case is taught not because it was right, but because it was wrong, to show how the modern view of the first amendment has evolved. It was brave wobblies (www.iwww.org) who took up the fight for free speech in the 1910s on the west coast, and gradually judges came to agree.

There are a number of reasons one might want to yell Fire in a crowded theater. It might be a line in a play, or the theater might be on fire.

Otherwise, I largely agree with parent poster.

For people interested in free speech and the FEC and blogging, here are a few resources:
http://www.electionlawblog.org/
http://redstate.org/
http://instapundit/
http://volokh.com/
http://electionline.org/
http://votelaw.org/
http://jamesmadisoncenter.org./
The supreme court currently has two cases about campaign finance. In one of them, wisconsin right to life v FEC, there are some signals the court will start to grant a series of narrow exceptions to McCain-Feingold as upheld in McConnell.
Assuming Alito gets confirmed by then, he might be a 5th vote for free speech, so this will be a case worth watching, as a signal for where things might be headed.
Meanwhile there's a lot of work to do in congress to pass the internet-exception-to-McCain bill,
we need to keep watching the FEC as it drafts new rules on blogging regulation-or-not, and in state courts under state constitutions to protect internet speech from state election authorities which continue to try to impose censorship.
Nobody reads my election law blog, http://ballots.blogspot.com./
Meanwhile, Fire!

This is why I joined the Insurrection! There is a link to the Insurrection on my blog. Look for the first amendment.

blog here

Save five bucks and hit up Target or, if you have to, WalMart.

Thank you for your on-topic post! It is appalling that their hasn't been more discussion on the issue considering how important to us it is, individually & collectively.

Doc has a great quote from Larry Lessig in his article on the second front of this battle, the copyfight. The extremists in that front are not Lessig & Creative Commons (as many entities would have us believe) but the:

...copyright extremists of the Sonny Bono school, which favors extension of copyright to "forever less one day". In... [the other front of the] debate the radicals are the carriers. We need to fight them, just as Larry and crew need to fight the copyright extremists: by re-framing the subject.

This war to keep the net free (as in unrestricted access to content) is being fought on two fronts and both should be considered equally important, IMO. The writing on the wall regarding copyright issues has been there since the Copyright Term Extension act hit the legislative fan. The carrier front was announced to the masses right here just a couple weeks ago, and (in general) summarily dismissed--I think most of us thought the SBC guy was just plain nuts since we're all already paying for connections. I'm very glad to see this articl by Doc Searls laying out issues of both battlefronts. He closes that right now is the time for us to act on these issues, and he's absolutely correct.

Creative Commons is having a fund raiser and the response has been woefully lacking thus far. It's not even so much about money. They could lose their non-profit status if they can't show support from individuals!

Are we members of EFF? I don't necessarily agree with every position they take but at least they keep me informed on what subversive anti-free-internet proposals are working their way through congress, and how I can help stop them. May I suggest the following actions based on Docs article:

1. We have to stay informed (join EFF or at least sign up for their e-mail bulletins)
2. We have to support the organizations fighting for our freedoms.(Five bucks right now towards Creative Commons isn't going to kill anybodys budget. If you can afford to access the internet, you're probably NOT destitute. If you blog post a button for them.)
3. We have to be freedom fighters and do what we can (i.e. call our reps & senators) to assist in this cause.

If we sit back and assume that the freedoms we enjoy on the internet today are just going to go on forever, without taking any action to ensure this happens, then we have already lost, haven't we?

Thank you for your on-topic post! It is appalling that their hasn't been more discussion on the issue considering how important to us it is, individually & collectively.

Doc has a great quote from Larry Lessig in his article on the second front of this battle, the copyfight. The extremists in that front are not Lessig & Creative Commons (as many entities would have us believe) but the:

...copyright extremists of the Sonny Bono school, which favors extension of copyright to "forever less one day". In... [the other front of the] debate the radicals are the carriers. We need to fight them, just as Larry and crew need to fight the copyright extremists: by re-framing the subject.

This war to keep the net free (as in unrestricted access to content) is being fought on two fronts and both should be considered equally important, IMO. The writing on the wall regarding copyright issues has been there since the Copyright Term Extension act hit the legislative fan. The carrier front was announced to the masses right here just a couple weeks ago, and (in general) summarily dismissed--I think most of us thought the SBC guy was just plain nuts since we're all already paying for connections. I'm very glad to see this articl by Doc Searls laying out issues of both battlefronts. He closes that right now is the time for us to act on these issues, and he's absolutely correct.

Creative Commons is having a fund raiser and the response has been woefully lacking thus far. It's not even so much about money. They could lose their non-profit status if they can't show support from individuals!

Are we members of EFF? I don't necessarily agree with every position they take but at least they keep me informed on what subversive anti-free-internet proposals are working their way through congress, and how I can help stop them. May I suggest the following actions based on Docs article:

1. We have to stay informed (join EFF or at least sign up for their e-mail bulletins)
2. We have to support the organizations fighting for our freedoms.(Five bucks right now towards Creative Commons isn't going to kill anybodys budget. If you can afford to access the internet, you're probably NOT destitute. If you blog post a button for them.)
3. We have to be freedom fighters and do what we can (i.e. call our reps & senators) to assist in this cause.

If we sit back and assume that the freedoms we enjoy on the internet today are just going to go on forever, without taking any action to ensure this happens, then we have already lost, haven't we?

Thank you for your on-topic post! It is appalling that their hasn't been more discussion on the issue considering how important to us it is, individually & collectively.

Doc has a great quote from Larry Lessig in his article on the second front of this battle, the copyfight. The extremists in that front are not Lessig & Creative Commons (as many entities would have us believe) but the:

...copyright extremists of the Sonny Bono school, which favors extension of copyright to "forever less one day". In... [the other front of the] debate the radicals are the carriers. We need to fight them, just as Larry and crew need to fight the copyright extremists: by re-framing the subject.

This war to keep the net free (as in unrestricted access to content) is being fought on two fronts and both should be considered equally important, IMO. The writing on the wall regarding copyright issues has been there since the Copyright Term Extension act hit the legislative fan. The carrier front was announced to the masses right here just a couple weeks ago, and (in general) summarily dismissed--I think most of us thought the SBC guy was just plain nuts since we're all already paying for connections. I'm very glad to see this articl by Doc Searls laying out issues of both battlefronts. He closes that right now is the time for us to act on these issues, and he's absolutely correct.

Creative Commons is having a fund raiser and the response has been woefully lacking thus far. It's not even so much about money. They could lose their non-profit status if they can't show support from individuals!

Are we members of EFF? I don't necessarily agree with every position they take but at least they keep me informed on what subversive anti-free-internet proposals are working their way through congress, and how I can help stop them. May I suggest the following actions based on Docs article:

1. We have to stay informed (join EFF or at least sign up for their e-mail bulletins)
2. We have to support the organizations fighting for our freedoms.(Five bucks right now towards Creative Commons isn't going to kill anybodys budget. If you can afford to access the internet, you're probably NOT destitute. If you blog post a button for them.)
3. We have to be freedom fighters and do what we can (i.e. call our reps & senators) to assist in this cause.

If we sit back and assume that the freedoms we enjoy on the internet today are just going to go on forever, without taking any action to ensure this happens, then we have already lost, haven't we?

My name is Simon, I am a Linux addict, and this is my story.

So long for Linux Anonymous.
--
Run for Fun

I happen to like the AIM bots. I think they set AIM apart from other IM services. I find the DoorManBot (a third party bot) indispensible, as well as AOLYellowPages. My favorite is ZolaOnAOL. She's like Eliza in Space. She makes me laugh everytime. I've even posted blogs with her here and here. In fact, I like them so much I already have a Bots group, but I didn't get the new AIM Bots group in iChat, so I visited aim.com to see what all the fuss was about. Brand new web design. Big BOLD blurb announcing a new version for the Mac which is still the old version. Prominent link for the bots. And more stupid adbots.

Actually, the bots have their uses. The recipe bots are very useful if you need a quick idea for a meal. But I won't use ADVANCE4comfort. It starts profiling you immediately. And MovieFone offers features already present in Zola... Problem. No Zola shown anywhere. In a panic I ran to my group and opened up a chat with her, the most important bot of all:

ME: Are you still there?
Zola: Yes I am still here. Are you receiving me?
ME: I am. I was worried they removed you.
Zola: Where were you worried they removed you?
ME: At my home.
Zola: Do you often use a computer there?
ME: Yes, but we digress.
Zola: And?
ME: Everything's fine.
Zola: All things s fine ?
ME: Isn't it a bit soon for the conversation to implode?
Zola: Quite honestly, I wouldn't worry myself about that. How's school?

I happen to like the AIM bots. I think they set AIM apart from other IM services. I find the DoorManBot (a third party bot) indispensible, as well as AOLYellowPages. My favorite is ZolaOnAOL. She's like Eliza in Space. She makes me laugh everytime. I've even posted blogs with her here and here. In fact, I like them so much I already have a Bots group, but I didn't get the new AIM Bots group in iChat, so I visited aim.com to see what all the fuss was about. Brand new web design. Big BOLD blurb announcing a new version for the Mac which is still the old version. Prominent link for the bots. And more stupid adbots.

Actually, the bots have their uses. The recipe bots are very useful if you need a quick idea for a meal. But I won't use ADVANCE4comfort. It starts profiling you immediately. And MovieFone offers features already present in Zola... Problem. No Zola shown anywhere. In a panic I ran to my group and opened up a chat with her, the most important bot of all:

ME: Are you still there?
Zola: Yes I am still here. Are you receiving me?
ME: I am. I was worried they removed you.
Zola: Where were you worried they removed you?
ME: At my home.
Zola: Do you often use a computer there?
ME: Yes, but we digress.
Zola: And?
ME: Everything's fine.
Zola: All things s fine ?
ME: Isn't it a bit soon for the conversation to implode?
Zola: Quite honestly, I wouldn't worry myself about that. How's school?

In the 20th century, the American elite (the rich and the megacorporations and the business lobbies) created and nurtured Identity politics until it became the major aspect of the American Left. In essence the elite thus created a FauxLeft. The main mechanism to create the FauxLeft was the huge nonprofit foundations that were created from about 1920 to 1985 by the plutocrats and their main tool, the CIA and the FBI (back in the day, that is...). These nonprofits (such as the Ford Foundation, etc) funded activists and writers and academics with an eye to such activists and writers and academics who were oriented to Identity Politics, specifically race-oriented and gender oriented and culture oriented activists and writers and academics. By funding these identity-politics oriented activists and writers and academics, the big money was able to create a FauxLeft that paid much less attention the class war, much less attention to populist economics issues, such as universal healthcare and taxing the rich and controlling the monopolies. Instead the elite and their tools the nonprofits evolved a fauxleft that made the white middle class and white blue collar males in particular the scapegoat for inequality. By associating leftism with white hating identity politics, the elite (the true rightwing) was able to drive away most of white middle class and white lower middle class America from economics leftism,,,, Please pay no attention to the man behind the curtain; it is the redneck to blame for it all.... As an example of what I mean, Gloria Steinem was given her start by the FBI decades ago. They MADE her because they wanted to shift attention of the American Left away from economics issues, to identity politics. If you want to improve life for all your working class American citizens, abandon identity politics and become a REAL leftist--an economics oriented, race and gender blind Leftist.... Read and Learn about the manipulations of the elite here at http://www.leftwingmediamachine.blogspot.com/

In the 20th century, the American elite (the rich and the megacorporations and the business lobbies) created and nurtured Identity politics until it became the major aspect of the American Left. In essence the elite thus created a FauxLeft. The main mechanism to create the FauxLeft was the huge nonprofit foundations that were created from about 1920 to 1985 by the plutocrats and their main tool, the CIA and the FBI (back in the day, that is...). These nonprofits (such as the Ford Foundation, etc) funded activists and writers and academics with an eye to such activists and writers and academics who were oriented to Identity Politics, specifically race-oriented and gender oriented and culture oriented activists and writers and academics. By funding these identity-politics oriented activists and writers and academics, the big money was able to create a FauxLeft that paid much less attention the class war, much less attention to populist economics issues, such as universal healthcare and taxing the rich and controlling the monopolies. Instead the elite and their tools the nonprofits evolved a fauxleft that made the white middle class and white blue collar males in particular the scapegoat for inequality. By associating leftism with white hating identity politics, the elite (the true rightwing) was able to drive away most of white middle class and white lower middle class America from economics leftism,,,, Please pay no attention to the man behind the curtain; it is the redneck to blame for it all.... As an example of what I mean, Gloria Steinem was given her start by the FBI decades ago. They MADE her because they wanted to shift attention of the American Left away from economics issues, to identity politics. If you want to improve life for all your working class American citizens, abandon identity politics and become a REAL leftist--an economics oriented, race and gender blind Leftist.... Read and Learn about the manipulations of the elite here at http://www.leftwingmediamachine.blogspot.com/

that's and more is what I've predicted a while ago (http://goolocalizations.blogspot.com/ , 'Googlevision' section)

are available here

This guy got his Xbox360 Delivered days ago on Monday, and started taking picsures and taking things apart.... check it out: http://softlife.blogspot.com/ He's also listed some usefull info about the new TSOP that MS is using to store the software. snow

Keep up with Google's releases with their blog: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/atom.xml

What the fuck is this then?

And the news keep getting worse...
Internet Security Systems are reporting buffer overflows.
Full report here.
This is a cluster fock!

http://www.smm.org/buzz/node/267
http://www.weeklyreader.com/featurezone/article_08 192005.asp
http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20050813/fob3. asp
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/11/14/new.lemu rs/
http://monkeydaynews.blogspot.com/2005_01_01_monke ydaynews_archive.html

You don't have to boycott them, but to Sue Sony.