Well, considering that their server is fried at the moment, I'm hoping that they'll look at it as a reasonable exception -- besides, I'm including ample pointers back to their website. (and the copyright notices).
It's not like I'm gonna make any money off of this. I will remember to remove the copies once their server has gotten off of it's electronic knees.
The reason why "Under God" was added to the pledge was to smoke out "Those athiest commie bastards". It was an attempt to force religion onto the people in the hopes of causing discomfort for those who were not christian.
There are many people in the states who believe as strongly about their god as we so about Ours.
For those who would yowl and scream about changing it to "one nation under Allah" or "Krishna", or any other name of god, consider what it feels like for those who worship in those religions -- or simply those who understand enough of the history of politics and religion to object to the politicization of religion.
(As Jesus said: "Give to Ceasar what belongs to Ceasar and give to God what belongs to God".)
With so much talk about overthrowing fundamentalist religious states in the Middle East it seems rather hypocritical fighting to keep/install fundamental religous features into US government structures.
OK: I got a few of the images. They're on my website. If you have missing images, or mirrors of your own, post in reply, or email to me, and I'll put pictures or pointers as appropriate on my page.
When you ask a pack of 20,000 geeks a question, YOu can pretty much expect that at least one of them is gonna be a dork that flames you for the question. This is not to justify the abusive response. I'm just pointing out that it was statistically probable dork response.
And yes, I was going for "Funny"; I wasn't attempting to troll.)
I realize that, but some moderators lack the funnybone necessary to recognize humor and tend to identify posts such as yours as 'troll'. It's just commen enough for me to have given up and started accepting it as 'normal'. The 'informative' thing, though, is just beyond my tolerance.
Since I'm literate, the varying colors are not a particularily valuable feature to me.
Literate's got nothing to do with it. It's really nice to pull a crumpled bill out of your pocket and know if you've got the right denomination before you uncrumple it. Also works scanning thru your wallet. You don't have to do much more than glance at the edge of a bill to know what it's worth.
It's also nice in case of 'accidents'... If a bill goes floating by in the wind, you know at a glance what it's worth. Blue ($5) isn't a big deal. Purple ($10) might be worth a bit of work. red ($50) is worth a good chase.
People are allowed to call the phone and try to talk to you. There's no national "do not ring my doorbell" list.
Where's your phone number?
There is a 'no solicitors' sign. Any door-to-door solicitor who ignores it is guilty of trespassing. Absent a DNC list, there's no way to do the same for phone numbers.
"Cannot find server or DNS Error" is not a page that a server sends back since there is no server in the loop. Its clientside generated page.
Pretty much the same net result:
Without site finder, 1 DNS request comes back with a NAK... No other net access.
With site finder, 1 DNS request gets a bogus ACK followed by an annoying page (in english to boot).
For my part, the site finder was probematic because I had a xcript that set up a service for various boxes, but (as a sanity check) would ping the box first to see if it existed. whereas before, typos would result in a DNS failure, now they would ping to sit-finder and succeed. Given that these boxes were bound to an old version of BIND (silly programmer tricks), I couldn't just install the bind patches. Instaead, I had to rewrite my scripts to explicitly toss out site-finder results.
This was a direct cost to my employer of about $50.
It was more like 150 lbs with an incredibly painful-to-look at complexion
I've come across a couple of channel/server owners who were very cute. One in particular was also a phototgrapher who could have easily been a model. It's all the more surprising when you don't expect it.
On the net, nobody knows you're a dog... but they don't know if you're drop-dead gorgeous either.
I think you misunderstand. I got my information from a CBC interview with the judge who was involved in the case. I'm guessing that you were reading the PR put out by McDonalds and friends?? Other companies were delivering their coffee at the lower temperature. McDonalds raised the temperature from the (safe) norm to the (unsafe) higher temperature to increase market share.
Btw: it wasn't just a 'stupid woman'. If it had just been her, there would have been no reason to award the punitive damages. Juries (and judges) do not just award punitive damages for the hell of it. There has to be has to be notably malicious or negligent activity or intent on the part of the defendant (especially on appeal) for a punitive award to stand. Your 'stupid woman' remark does not explain why the award of punitive damages stood (albeit lowered to 'just' $400K) in the court of appeals.
The difference in temperatures between what was safe and what McDonalds was using was only a few degrees. McDonals marketing determined that they would get X% more market share by doing so mostly because coffee would stay warm for longer starting at the higher initial temperature.
The reason why most other companies did not use the higher temperature was that it was well known that those few degrees made the difference between painfully hot and wound-causing hot.
McDonalds bean-counters calculated that they could probaby force people to settle their wilfull-wounding lawsuits for a low enough ammount that it would be exceeded by the increased moarket share. Most customers would not recognize the significance of the difference between the two temperatures until it was far too late. (I.E. they were in hospital).
Quick upshot: McDonalds was wilfully wounding their customers solely to make more profit. The intent of the @2.7 punitive damage award was not to pay off the lady for the cost of her injury. It was to punnish McDonalds for putting profits ahead of safety.This is really No different than a car company putting new thin-walled tires on their car because they look neat and will sell more, but knowing that people will get injured in the resulting blowouts..
In a court case (in Canada) our Supreme Court Justices made it clear that 'informed consent' is not really informed if it is missing information that might cause a reasonable person to change their mind. I think that McDonald's extra few degrees in their coffee and the safety implications of that would classify as such 'pertinent' missing information.
What is funny to me is not the woman's fight, but the extremist reaction of those in power -- That someone would see so much threat in women's fight for the right to vote that they would treat them as terrorists and threats to society.
T'is silly and stupid. in our eyes now, but it was deadly serious back then.
There are still fights for women's rights today, but it has now gone from a fight for the right to be considered "a person", to preventing wage discrimination. The fight's not over, but we've definitely come a long ways.
You forgot to also mention that I can decompose an RPM into it's SPEC file and scripts and easily see if they do anything that I don't like. On the other hand, if someone comes along and realizes that I run ES5 and figures out my IP address (either because they have access to the central ES5 server or because they found out outside of ES5) they can then connect an beat my system to a pulp.
I don't have to do anything to have it happen, and I can't do anything to stop it from happening (other than not running a malware version of ES5)
OK, so maybe I shouldn't have split this into two pieces..... neither half really makes sense without the other.
What I was trying to point out is that SCO's apparent tactic is rather like the parsley, sage, Rosemary and Thyme thing. Examined, each piece by itself, it almost makes sense -- but not quite. The "then she'll be a true love of mine" is analogous to SCO's admonitions to the Linux community to "doesn't cure the breach". However, like the lover's call to do things like make him a Cambric shirt (apparently a patch-quilt design) "with never a seam, nor needle work), The job is all but impossible.
Even more sinister than that, I'm now convinced that SCO really has no proof of copyright or patent violation -- nor do they any longer have the expertise to even attempt to find such violations if they existed. What they've done instead is to throw the gauntlet down to the Open Source community and challenge us to find any possible breaches ourselves. -- and should we ever find such a substantial breach, SCO would probably use thatas their proof of breach.
Given that the open source community has failed to find any substantive proof of violation and that SCO's only proof so far have turned out to be public domain on one hand and possible proof that thy have (once again) violated the BSD copyright on the other, I think that it's time that we stopped doing their legal research for them and challenged them back.
The Open Source community has a responsibility (morally, if not legally) to investigate any real accusation of copyright violation (with file names line numbers and annotations) and correct any allegation found to have substance. SCO, on the other hand, has dramatically failed to provide such an allegation, and so we should now treat their unsubstantiated rantings as precisely what we've determined them to be -- spectacular garbage. If they should ever provide anything substantive, then we should respond to it appropriately.
So deflecting an asteroid is actually a rather big project - it's not trivial (as in we're nowehere even close, and it would required Manhattan-project level investment to get there). Maybe we could do it, maybe we couldn't. But that's assuming 15 years warning, and the smallest possible margin. If something popped up with just a few years warning, and more mass, we'd all be utterly screwed.
Facing the possiblilty of subcontinental evaporation and mass annhilation, I figure that we'd be able to convince the governments of the world to get together on a manhattan-progect scale of things. I also agree with you that the closer and bigger the object, the harder it is going to be to shift it's course significantly.
In other words, all the more reason to put a couple of million dollars into the search for earth-crossing asteroids. Either it will help us sleep easier at night, or it will allow us to properly plan to fix the problem.
Worst case, it'll tell us just how long we have to pray for forgiveness (or do things for which such prayers would be appropriate were we inclined to make them.).
Compared to what we've spent on the (just as elusive) search for Saddamn, I'd say it's both a pittance, and far more worthwhile.
My second point is that their demand letter sounds a piss-assed as their complaints to the Linux community:
We think that you have something of ours... It's somewhere in
this pile of code. If you finde it, remove it and tell us what you did, then we'll sue you for having had it in there in the first place. If you don't, then we'll sue you for not finding it.
They've really been asking the Linux community (and now SGI) to self-incriminate ourseves. Having seen them do this stunt twice, I'm reasonably sure that they don't really have a smoking gun. They've looked and they haven't found anything substantial, so now they're engaging in hand-waving and threats in the hopes that we will go hunting and find something for them
(Remember: to 1000 eyes any problem is shallow -- but SCO only has 3).
Right now, I think that the best thing for both the Linux community (and SGI) to do woud be to stop hunting code similarities for SCO, and challenge them to tell us specifically where the violations are, or shut up and go find someone to harrass.
If SCO is willing to document specific copyright violations, then I'll happily do whatever I can to help verify and (once verified), fix the breaches. -- and by specific I mean file name and line numbers in both original SCO code and Linux releases. (they would also have to specify release version).
Until they're willing and able to do something like that, they can eat their press releases.
There'a a song by Simon and Garfunkel called 'Scarbrorough fair'. It's a message to the singer's ex-love ("she once was a true love of mine"), and it has two repeating parts: "Parsley, Sage, Rosemary and Tyme" and "Then she'll be a true love of mine".
Musically, the song is absolutely gorgeous, but one day a lover of mine explained the story of the song:
First of all, Parseley, sage, rosemary and tyme are 3 common spices which are (by themselves) delicious and harmless, but if you mix them together, the result is poisonous.
The second part to note is that his requests to her for what she should do whence "then she'll be a true love of mine". are all impossible.
This beautiful song when fully understood is really a poison pen letter. In HitchHikers Guide To The Galasy terminoligy it's executive summary is: "do seven impossible things before breakfast, and I'll meet you at the restaurant at the end of the universe where we can discuss the possibility of our getting together again.
Given that the last really big rock we found was predicted to have it's close encounter something like 15 years from now, let's see:
$ units 2inches/second miles/15years * 14941.726
So imparting a delta-V of 2inches/second perpendicular to it's path would be enough to deflect the rock by more than the diameter of earth....
units 1million-miles/14years miles/hour * 8.1485395
so 8 miles/hour would be enough to give us a 1,000,000 mile comfort zone in 14 years.... What more do you want? (Btw: if we were to attach an ion engine to the rock (presuming it didn't spin) and run it for 6 months, it would require roughly:
units 8miles/hour gravity*6months * 2.3112717e-08
20 BILLIONTHS of a G acceleration over 6 months to get that sort of shift needed to give us a milion miles clearance. This is certainly within the capability of current technology. This does, however, require that we continue the work of hunting for these rocks, and hope the we find them far enough out that we can take on the task of moving them out of the our way.
Both of them were were on the 27'th One hit the earth, the other didn't. I'm guessing something along the lines of the cloud of a shattered asteroid / comet. To have those two events occur litteraly within hours of each other is hard to dismiss as a coincidence.
I would also note that the Indian event also appears to have consisted of at least two pieces (one of which is said to have done minor damage in a different village). I'm guessing that there are more pieces out there (smaller, perhaps, but out there).
Slashdot Mirror
It's not like I'm gonna make any money off of this. I will remember to remove the copies once their server has gotten off of it's electronic knees.
There are many people in the states who believe as strongly about their god as we so about Ours. For those who would yowl and scream about changing it to "one nation under Allah" or "Krishna", or any other name of god, consider what it feels like for those who worship in those religions -- or simply those who understand enough of the history of politics and religion to object to the politicization of religion. (As Jesus said: "Give to Ceasar what belongs to Ceasar and give to God what belongs to God".)
With so much talk about overthrowing fundamentalist religious states in the Middle East it seems rather hypocritical fighting to keep/install fundamental religous features into US government structures.
OK: I got a few of the images. They're on my website. If you have missing images, or mirrors of your own, post in reply, or email to me, and I'll put pictures or pointers as appropriate on my page.
If you forward the image to me, I'll put it on a web page (and see how well *it* survives the slashdotting)
When you ask a pack of 20,000 geeks a question, YOu can pretty much expect that at least one of them is gonna be a dork that flames you for the question. This is not to justify the abusive response. I'm just pointing out that it was statistically probable dork response.
I realize that, but some moderators lack the funnybone necessary to recognize humor and tend to identify posts such as yours as 'troll'. It's just commen enough for me to have given up and started accepting it as 'normal'. The 'informative' thing, though, is just beyond my tolerance.
Literate's got nothing to do with it. It's really nice to pull a crumpled bill out of your pocket and know if you've got the right denomination before you uncrumple it. Also works scanning thru your wallet. You don't have to do much more than glance at the edge of a bill to know what it's worth.
It's also nice in case of 'accidents'... If a bill goes floating by in the wind, you know at a glance what it's worth. Blue ($5) isn't a big deal. Purple ($10) might be worth a bit of work. red ($50) is worth a good chase.
Funny? sure
TrollBait? Perhaps but Informative???????!
Sheeesh.
Hey, you're right! It is dead!
(Oh, damn.... I blocked it with iptables, too)
Pretty much the same net result:
Without site finder, 1 DNS request comes back with a NAK... No other net access.
With site finder, 1 DNS request gets a bogus ACK followed by an annoying page (in english to boot).
For my part, the site finder was probematic because I had a xcript that set up a service for various boxes, but (as a sanity check) would ping the box first to see if it existed. whereas before, typos would result in a DNS failure, now they would ping to sit-finder and succeed. Given that these boxes were bound to an old version of BIND (silly programmer tricks), I couldn't just install the bind patches. Instaead, I had to rewrite my scripts to explicitly toss out site-finder results.
This was a direct cost to my employer of about $50.
I've come across a couple of channel/server owners who were very cute. One in particular was also a phototgrapher who could have easily been a model. It's all the more surprising when you don't expect it.
On the net, nobody knows you're a dog... but they don't know if you're drop-dead gorgeous either.
You don't. That's why it's only 90 days... After that long without a patch, chances are that you're gonna end up 0wned by some script kiddie.
:-}
Who the frell is Eddie Izzard???! (excuse the cross-series reference).
Btw: it wasn't just a 'stupid woman'. If it had just been her, there would have been no reason to award the punitive damages. Juries (and judges) do not just award punitive damages for the hell of it. There has to be has to be notably malicious or negligent activity or intent on the part of the defendant (especially on appeal) for a punitive award to stand. Your 'stupid woman' remark does not explain why the award of punitive damages stood (albeit lowered to 'just' $400K) in the court of appeals.
The reason why most other companies did not use the higher temperature was that it was well known that those few degrees made the difference between painfully hot and wound-causing hot.
McDonalds bean-counters calculated that they could probaby force people to settle their wilfull-wounding lawsuits for a low enough ammount that it would be exceeded by the increased moarket share. Most customers would not recognize the significance of the difference between the two temperatures until it was far too late. (I.E. they were in hospital).
Quick upshot: McDonalds was wilfully wounding their customers solely to make more profit. The intent of the @2.7 punitive damage award was not to pay off the lady for the cost of her injury. It was to punnish McDonalds for putting profits ahead of safety.This is really No different than a car company putting new thin-walled tires on their car because they look neat and will sell more, but knowing that people will get injured in the resulting blowouts..
In a court case (in Canada) our Supreme Court Justices made it clear that 'informed consent' is not really informed if it is missing information that might cause a reasonable person to change their mind. I think that McDonald's extra few degrees in their coffee and the safety implications of that would classify as such 'pertinent' missing information.
T'is silly and stupid. in our eyes now, but it was deadly serious back then.
There are still fights for women's rights today, but it has now gone from a fight for the right to be considered "a person", to preventing wage discrimination. The fight's not over, but we've definitely come a long ways.
I don't have to do anything to have it happen, and I can't do anything to stop it from happening (other than not running a malware version of ES5)
OK, so maybe I shouldn't have split this into two pieces..... neither half really makes sense without the other.
What I was trying to point out is that SCO's apparent tactic is rather like the parsley, sage, Rosemary and Thyme thing. Examined, each piece by itself, it almost makes sense -- but not quite. The "then she'll be a true love of mine" is analogous to SCO's admonitions to the Linux community to "doesn't cure the breach". However, like the lover's call to do things like make him a Cambric shirt (apparently a patch-quilt design) "with never a seam, nor needle work), The job is all but impossible.
Even more sinister than that, I'm now convinced that SCO really has no proof of copyright or patent violation -- nor do they any longer have the expertise to even attempt to find such violations if they existed. What they've done instead is to throw the gauntlet down to the Open Source community and challenge us to find any possible breaches ourselves. -- and should we ever find such a substantial breach, SCO would probably use thatas their proof of breach.
Given that the open source community has failed to find any substantive proof of violation and that SCO's only proof so far have turned out to be public domain on one hand and possible proof that thy have (once again) violated the BSD copyright on the other, I think that it's time that we stopped doing their legal research for them and challenged them back.
The Open Source community has a responsibility (morally, if not legally) to investigate any real accusation of copyright violation (with file names line numbers and annotations) and correct any allegation found to have substance. SCO, on the other hand, has dramatically failed to provide such an allegation, and so we should now treat their unsubstantiated rantings as precisely what we've determined them to be -- spectacular garbage. If they should ever provide anything substantive, then we should respond to it appropriately.
Facing the possiblilty of subcontinental evaporation and mass annhilation, I figure that we'd be able to convince the governments of the world to get together on a manhattan-progect scale of things. I also agree with you that the closer and bigger the object, the harder it is going to be to shift it's course significantly.
In other words, all the more reason to put a couple of million dollars into the search for earth-crossing asteroids. Either it will help us sleep easier at night, or it will allow us to properly plan to fix the problem.
Worst case, it'll tell us just how long we have to pray for forgiveness (or do things for which such prayers would be appropriate were we inclined to make them.).
Compared to what we've spent on the (just as elusive) search for Saddamn, I'd say it's both a pittance, and far more worthwhile.
(Remember: to 1000 eyes any problem is shallow -- but SCO only has 3).
Right now, I think that the best thing for both the Linux community (and SGI) to do woud be to stop hunting code similarities for SCO, and challenge them to tell us specifically where the violations are, or shut up and go find someone to harrass.
If SCO is willing to document specific copyright violations, then I'll happily do whatever I can to help verify and (once verified), fix the breaches. -- and by specific I mean file name and line numbers in both original SCO code and Linux releases. (they would also have to specify release version).
Until they're willing and able to do something like that, they can eat their press releases .
Musically, the song is absolutely gorgeous, but one day a lover of mine explained the story of the song:
First of all, Parseley, sage, rosemary and tyme are 3 common spices which are (by themselves) delicious and harmless, but if you mix them together, the result is poisonous.
The second part to note is that his requests to her for what she should do whence "then she'll be a true love of mine". are all impossible.
This beautiful song when fully understood is really a poison pen letter. In HitchHikers Guide To The Galasy terminoligy it's executive summary is: "do seven impossible things before breakfast, and I'll meet you at the restaurant at the end of the universe where we can discuss the possibility of our getting together again.
(some moderator has no sense of humor... It started with an anon coward's '0' rating, and they modded it "overrated" to -1. I'd rate it as +1 Funny.)
I would also note that the Indian event also appears to have consisted of at least two pieces (one of which is said to have done minor damage in a different village). I'm guessing that there are more pieces out there (smaller, perhaps, but out there).