Slashdot Mirror

I wrote about the problems in the Eurozone that arise from having conflicting monetary and fiscal policies in a blog entry linked to below. Basically put, the Eurozone forces member states to have materially identical monetary policies due to the unified currency and centralized state banking. Under such circumstances, nations are unable to compensate for national situations using fiscal policy alone, and their attempt to do so is a large part of what has landed Europe in the fiscal mess they're currently in.

http://www.mrnaz.com/?s=publish-blog&entryid=208

I like this trend for computer systems to protect us from our own stupidity. Here's another one:
http://static.mrnaz.com/ms_security_works.jpg

In Brazil, you can buy your alcohol cheap!

On a more serious note, all this ethanol scare tactics are BS. The problems that ethanol cause with food prices are because the US is using corn as a base source. If they used a more sensible crop like sugar cane it'd be better.

I've been to Brazil, I've seen how well their ethanol infrastructure works. To all you ethanol haters/fear mongers I have only this to say:

It works, bitches.

In Brazil, you can buy your alcohol cheap!

On a more serious note, all this ethanol scare tactics are BS. The problems that ethanol cause with food prices are because the US is using corn as a base source. If they used a more sensible crop like sugar cane it'd be better.

I've been to Brazil, I've seen how well their ethanol infrastructure works. To all you ethanol haters/fear mongers I have only this to say:

It works, bitches.

I wrote a full guide on setting up the mail server using Debian and the outstanding mail server package Archiveopteryx. You can read it here:

http://www.mrnaz.com/?s=publish-blog&entryid=197

I've got a few comments on the guide and things to consider before running your own mail server.

• Your point about PTR records is not optional. If you don't have proper PTR records, you will be blocked by a majority of sites
• Static IP. If you run from something seen as a dynamic IP address, you will be in even worse doo-doo than not having proper PTR records
• You must understand the implications of using SPF. If you publish an SPF record for your mail domain, you must ensure that all out-going mail "from" your domain comes from your server.
• You must be prepared for heavy loads. If a spammer sends a million messages to the net forging your return address, you will get tens of thousands of bounces in quick succession.
• Ideally you should have a back-up MX somewhere.
• You will need to have good uptimes and connectivity.
• SMTP is simple, but understanding the subtleties of mail transport is not. You will need to understand.
• You will need good, reliable, DNS service. Be sure to have a caching DNS server on your local net.

I don't want to discourage people from learning about and playing with running mail servers, but I would strongly recommend that you do so only with non-critical mail domains. Keep the mail that you really need hosted by professionals.

I recently set up my own mail server. It's easier than you think (well it was easier than I though it was going to be) and you can have your own domain permanently and sure that it'll never be yanked out from under you. I wrote a full guide on setting up the mail server using Debian and the outstanding mail server package Archiveopteryx. You can read it here:

http://www.mrnaz.com/?s=publish-blog&entryid=197

Here's my answer to this particular Ask Slashdot.

You've ripped off the original. Which you can use to actually provide a useful query string instead of just snark.

Come on now. I'm getting tired of all the "I'm thinking of learning $fooCommonThing and I need Slashdot to spoon feed me Google results." type questions.

I cannot believe this made front page when there are other, rather good questions in the firehose that would result in good dialog and idea exchange, but that get rejected.

Seriously, is there some shortage on Java dicumentation out there or something? Granted, I don't know the language as I never had a need for it, but I can't trip over without falling into a pile of Java tutorials.

Here's my answer to this particular Ask Slashdot.

Is that anything like this?

Personally, I think this is one of the dumbest questions ever to grace the pages of Ask Slashdot.

If you're buying a machine and are savvy enough to know a) what hardware components you want and b) install Linux yourself after a format, why on Earth don't you just buy the parts and build it yourself?

Even if you have an off mix of skills whereby you can do all the above except assemble a PC, you can go to a your local small office geek shop, select the parts and pay them a nominal fee to assemble. Where I live, it's $50 for assembly. Going this route represents a third to half saving on similar specced hardware from Dell.

Are there really Slashdot readers not savvy enough to do this? Or is this a MS sponsored story to get Windows into the hands of potential Linux users to make the jump just that much less appealing? I recently jumped to Linux, and I can tell you (presumably MS knows this too) that inertia is a big part in people not switching to Linux. I'm not usually given to Slashspiracies, but this question really pushes the bounds of Hanlon's Razor; someone able to install Linux on bare metal is unlikely to also be unskilled enough to find cheap bare metal boxes. Thus, I think we have the strongest proof yet that Slashdot does make quiet back room deals about its content.

I agree with all of that, except this bit:

"Even if we all decide today that we're going to swear off fossil fuels, the process of converting our society to the alternatives will take decades, decades in which we will still rely on millions of barrels of oil every day."

Zero footprint carbon fuels are viable, but that doesn't mean they give off zero carbon, it just means that they give off the same amount of carbon as they absorb in their production. I.e., fuel crops. There's lots of BS going around about it being a non-viable proposition, but there are those in the world who beg to differ. It's not that the economy isn't ready for it, the issue is that big money interests have too much invested in the status quo, and too selfish an attitude to see the bigger picture.

Well, I don't know if you're a terrorist or not, but you could definitely warrant some questions...

Profile pic

You still seem to have me mistaken for someone who dislikes liberals and the sexual revolution. I'm the first to stand up and defend civil rights.

Mind telling me why you'd let your pre-pubescent girl read/watch either of those things? They clearly aren't intended for her consumption. If I happen to like watching Sex in the City should I give up that because of the message it conveys to young children? Or should the parents of said children stop relying on the TV as a babysitter and actually talk to their kids?

I am a surrogate parent for a nephew. I consider unregulated TV to be the biggest mistake any parent can make, and take very great care to regulate what gets shown on our idiot box. The sad fact of the matter is, my nephew (and the daughters of like-minded parents) go to school with other kids with lunchboxes portraying half-naked MTV stars shakin' that ass. I can stop images like this from getting shown to my kid here in my home, but whether I like it or not, other parents who raise their kids like little Marilyn Mansons or Courtney Loves forge the environment that my child would have to learn in. No man is an island, neither is that man's son or daughter.

Then maybe you should be teaching different values? My values would dictate that I keep my kids away from the mall because I don't happen to agree with the message of consumption, greed and entitlement seen at most shopping malls. If you want your kids to learn your values then you need to teach them -- not rely on soceity to do it for you.

I'm not trying to rely on society to do it for me, but to think that you can perfectly shield children from the infectious Jackass/Cosmo non-culture is naive. I will decry the crass parts of society until the day I die because I realise that we all have to live together, I cannot make myself or my children an island in a sea of intellectual and spiritual dereliction. I must actively try to improve the lot of my fellow people, it is my duty.

Then don't buy shit from companies that employ underage models. I find it to be just as abhorrent as you do, which is why I refuse to buy stuff from them.

I agree. If only it made any difference to them at all. I suspect that you and I agree on all fundamental issues. I think however you've got me painted as a right wing conservative. I am most certainly not.

You still seem to have me mistaken for someone who dislikes liberals and the sexual revolution. I'm the first to stand up and defend civil rights.

Mind telling me why you'd let your pre-pubescent girl read/watch either of those things? They clearly aren't intended for her consumption. If I happen to like watching Sex in the City should I give up that because of the message it conveys to young children? Or should the parents of said children stop relying on the TV as a babysitter and actually talk to their kids?

I am a surrogate parent for a nephew. I consider unregulated TV to be the biggest mistake any parent can make, and take very great care to regulate what gets shown on our idiot box. The sad fact of the matter is, my nephew (and the daughters of like-minded parents) go to school with other kids with lunchboxes portraying half-naked MTV stars shakin' that ass. I can stop images like this from getting shown to my kid here in my home, but whether I like it or not, other parents who raise their kids like little Marilyn Mansons or Courtney Loves forge the environment that my child would have to learn in. No man is an island, neither is that man's son or daughter.

Then maybe you should be teaching different values? My values would dictate that I keep my kids away from the mall because I don't happen to agree with the message of consumption, greed and entitlement seen at most shopping malls. If you want your kids to learn your values then you need to teach them -- not rely on soceity to do it for you.

I'm not trying to rely on society to do it for me, but to think that you can perfectly shield children from the infectious Jackass/Cosmo non-culture is naive. I will decry the crass parts of society until the day I die because I realise that we all have to live together, I cannot make myself or my children an island in a sea of intellectual and spiritual dereliction. I must actively try to improve the lot of my fellow people, it is my duty.

Then don't buy shit from companies that employ underage models. I find it to be just as abhorrent as you do, which is why I refuse to buy stuff from them.

I agree. If only it made any difference to them at all. I suspect that you and I agree on all fundamental issues. I think however you've got me painted as a right wing conservative. I am most certainly not.

I agree with the sentiment that freedom of intellectual exploration is definitely a positive, but I disagree that intellectual freedom requires the absence of social or behavioural restraint.

I like arguing an opposing point with someone who can express him/herself with erudition. I'd like to hear more about your views, care to get in touch with me? There are a bunch of ways to contact me on my web site www.mrnaz.com.

The best minicam that I'm aware of is the Casio Exilim EX-Sxxx series. I've had every model in the series up to and including the EX-S880. The newly released EX-S10 is smaller than the others, and I'm about to buy it in the next few days. Great sensor quality, great optics, easy to use, fast startup times, absolutely tiny and easy to use. Although make sure you get the ones coming from Casio's Japan assembly plant, as the ones from the Chinese assembly plant are slightly inferior in subtle but noticeable ways.

I am already a Muslim. I don't want to kill you because you are non-Muslim, but if Fox News tells you I do, feel free to cross the street if you see me coming. I won't take offense.

Ooo oo! I've been waiting for my trash to be slashdotted!

So your definition of a blog entry is something that is written in a blog, and an article is something published by "someone else"? Not very useful definitions at all.

I don't know how one would define "blog entry" and "article" for the purposes of saying what is and is not one or the other. However, I think it is safe to say that while this is a blog entry, this certainly is not. They are both only published in my blog.

Personally, I think that the difference between "blog entry" and "article" can only be defined relative to each other, in respect of their content and in the context of the vernacular use of the two terms. A blog entry is just an online public diary of events or anecdotes, whereas an article would be an in depth discussion of a particular subject. Of course, that distinction is highly subjective. What one man considers an article could be just a blog entry to another. Nonetheless, I feel that calling all entries in a blog "blog entries" is just as silly as calling all parts of a newspaper "articles". I'm aware of my apparent violation of the strict definitions of the words, but I'm *hoping* you're insightful enough to see the contextual distinction I am making.

So your definition of a blog entry is something that is written in a blog, and an article is something published by "someone else"? Not very useful definitions at all.

I don't know how one would define "blog entry" and "article" for the purposes of saying what is and is not one or the other. However, I think it is safe to say that while this is a blog entry, this certainly is not. They are both only published in my blog.

Personally, I think that the difference between "blog entry" and "article" can only be defined relative to each other, in respect of their content and in the context of the vernacular use of the two terms. A blog entry is just an online public diary of events or anecdotes, whereas an article would be an in depth discussion of a particular subject. Of course, that distinction is highly subjective. What one man considers an article could be just a blog entry to another. Nonetheless, I feel that calling all entries in a blog "blog entries" is just as silly as calling all parts of a newspaper "articles". I'm aware of my apparent violation of the strict definitions of the words, but I'm *hoping* you're insightful enough to see the contextual distinction I am making.

I agree. In fact I recently wrote an article about why I think that FF has lost the huge lead it had over IE in terms of technical prowess. That lead has not been lost, but it certainly has been eroded.

Here's my article.

I wouldn't just use a Firefox Lite on old PCs, I'd use it on my dual core 2gb main PC.

I'm teaching myself wxPython at the moment and you sound like you have things to offer, can I ask you to drop me a line? You can find all my contact details at http://www.mrnaz.com/
Look forward to hearing from you :)

Not all moves to place fetters on the free market are the result of the hidden agendas of slavering, bloody thirsty autocrats, despite the media's attempt to make it seem so. The free market will not feed the poor, or give them medication or save their lives, as none of those activities are profitable. Ideas that save human life are the property of every human alive, and I will fight until the day I die the rights of people to unreasonably profit from or withhold those ideas from humankind. Those of you about to jump in with "but who'd pay for the research" arguments, pull your pants back up and get away from me. I've heard them all before and written on the subject many times. If our society cannot place a value on the saving of life itself, then we need to have a good, long, hard look at the belief that our society is the greatest one on Earth.

Oh, fuck. I just visited your site. It's YASFB (Yet Another Stupid Fucking Blog). Ignore my prior post. Use the following instead: "<a href="http://www.mrnaz.com">my boring stupid shit blog</a>", which yields "my boring stupid shit blog".

You can turn your sig ("www.mrnaz.com") into a link as follows: "<a href="http://www.mrnaz.com">www.mrnaz.com</a>", which yields "www.mrnaz.com".

If you already know how to do this, well, then, why didn't you?

No, it's just that in my experience if a person has the combination of adamant belief in inaccurate information as well as acrimonious self-righeousness, there is no point in engaging them in discussion.

By way of example, you seem to hold some grudge against the Muslim people, which is rather strange given that a) the only time the Jewish people have enjoyed protection and prosperity under a non-Jewish, non-secular government was under the Ottoman government and b) persecution of Jewish people has long been at the hands of Europeans and Christians. The Arab world reacted to a huge influx of Jewish migrants in the 30s and 40s, as well as the creation of a Jewish state in the middle of Arabia, where it had no logical reason to be. The Arabs owed nothing to the Jewish people for the holocaust, why make them pay? Given the support the US gives to Israel, why not just make Israel in the US? That'd put an end to the Middle East dilema pretty quickly. Incidentally, you did not "blow my argument out of the water", you simply played the all-too-familiar "Jews are victims therefore need special treatment" card, which doesn't fly with me. Anyone who suffers should be helped. When I see help going to famine in Africa or disease in Asia then I'll review my stance, but until then there are people more in need. Israel is doing just fine. You can say what you want about this, but no amount of arguing or twisting or wheeling will change the fact that millions suffer and die while the rest of the world dresses up their own agendas as the most important. I have written about this before, but somehow, I don't think you'll care about the plight of anyone who is not Israeli.

I have many Jewish friends, and even they will admit that current belligerence aside, their people have historically been most well-received by Muslims than any other group. Furthermore, the only real time Jews, Christians and Muslims have lived together peacefully was under Ottoman governance.

Finally, don't give me this "lowly Israeli" BS. Israelis are not lowly or in need of sympathy. With the 4th largest military in the world and the recipient of more military support and US "Aid" than Africa, Asia and indeed the rest of the world cobined, the Israelis are neither "lowly" nor are they in need of anyone's sympathy or aid. Hell, Israel gets more out of the US taxpayer than any single US state.

I feel very strongly about this, and would like to see a reversal of the reduction to money of all things, including morality. I wrote an essay on this topic, if you care to read it:
http://www.mrnaz.com/?mode=journal&entryid=122

I can see one having loyalty to GNU/Linux, after all, being community based, people can take and receive from it directly at a personal level. But Google? They actually did you a favour? As in, they did something that they otherwise would not have done for your personal benefit? Or even the benefit of a group of people that you are a part of? I would sincerely love to know what this is.

Brand loyalty can often be because a customer believes in a philosophy of a company's activities. A prime example would be me buying carpet from Interface. I would buy carpet from them even were it twice the price of the nearest competitor. I would do this because I am loyal to their ideals. I would change brand only if their fundamental philosophy changed. There is a balance, and if their products became absolutely abominable, then I would review this position, but I am making the point that brand loyalty is often not just immature, misplaced "fanboyism", and does factor rationally into a purcahse decision.

Brand loyalty could also be a statement of complaint against a competitor's actions. We're always told that in the free world we can vote with our dollar. Fat lot of worth that has, when bone heads like you can be bought for a 1% price difference. If a company is engaging in pollution, unfair trading, selling substandard or harmful products, the economic theory states that consumers will shun this by avoiding their products, hence, the market will adjust these externalities out. Bollocks I say, and you've just proved me right. Most consumers are too ignorant and apathetic, reduced to simple counters of dollars and cents, with zero insight into the wider ramifications of a particular company's actions. I wrote about this very topic, feel free to read it here.

I loved that your rant against brand loyalty was baed on the idea that it was immature, when in the next breath you cite Google as a do-gooder, which is just tomorrow's hegemonic corporation in wait for the current ones to get out of the way. If you're naieve enough to think that by not charging you to use their search engine / webmail / mapping features they are doing you a favour, then you have no business starting rants with "Now that I've matured".

The reason capitalists are so forceful about pushing their ideals is becuase capitalism benefits capitalists. Moderm economic models just don't work unless everyone behaves in an economically "rational" manner. I.e., with self-interest being the first, foremost and only motivation to get out of bed every morning. Without everyone behaving in this way, not only do economic models fall apart, but economic manipulation by the government and big business becomes impossible as the economy does not follow the "rules". Monetary policy cannot operate if people consider social values such as education or health care more important than their mortgage repayments.

This was illustrated in the last Australian election where an obviously anti-social, anti-welfare, pro-corporate John Howard was elected simply be hinting that the opposition would result in higher interest rates. A claim that was contested by economists in the major Australian economic research groups anyway. Once elected, interest rates rose anyway, and he immedialy set upon the task of dismantling public funding for education and health care and setting up American style industries where citizens pay huge prices for these "commodities". Mark my words Australia: Medicare will not survive another Howard term. He has implemented many anti-public policies such as cutting the number of government funded places for medicine at universities to create an artificial shortage. Another move was the proposal to privatise Medibank Private. These policies increase the pressure on the healthcare industry to "marketise" its service offerings. Step by step, as Australians become used to each bite that is taken out of their health care system, the goal of giving the health care cake to the corporate rulers is being accomplished. Such subtle policies only work if people think only in terms of capitalist "economic rationalism" and ignore things like long term social effects, ethics and equity. They are strengthened if people behave like a mob of individuals rather than a society with values.

Economic rationalism is the religion du jour, it is the ideology that the current ruling class push upon the masses to ensure that they collectively behave in a predictable, manipulable manner. I have just written an essay on economic rationalism, feel free to read it, and perhaps comment.

I believe in the market. But I also believe in humanity. I believe in equity, ethics, morals and fairness. I believe that the market has lost these things due to a systematic effort by those in power to strip the population of their ability to think socially or morally. You think consumerism is only about sellign stuff? Not so. It is deeper than that. It is engineered to not only sell stuff, but preserve the environment in which stuff can be sold. That is, preserve selfishness, whimsical behavior, aversion to social values and prevent philosophical evaluation of our own condition. In other words, the market has been hijacked, its values stripped away and it is being used as an engine to amass wealth and power for those leading it by the nose.

I wonder what would happen if the software was used to process photos from the original Apollo moon landing. I am of the belief that there is a great possibility that at least the original Apollo landing was faked. Subsequent missions I am not too sure about, but I believe at least the first one was a fraud. I wrote this page up many years ago when I was in 10th grade at school. After reading it again just now, however, I really think I need to update it for new facts I've discovered and general maturity of presentation :)