Opening a command line in W10 is simply right click the windows menu button (or press Win+X), and click "PowerShell" or "PowerShell (Admin)" (I think there's a setting to replace this with the old-school command line if you really want). Or tap the windows key, then type "cmd" as though it were a command line itself. Or win+R and type "cmd" into the Run menu (it stores history so if a command line was your last command, it's just Win+R, Enter). That last has been how I've opened command lines since XP, the second has been there since I think Vista, and IIRC the first is a new addition (maybe was in W8?).
When I press the windows button, windows redraws my entire damned display with useless icons and grinds to a halt while it tries to predict what I'm typing. We used to push the windows button to pop up a quick an unobtrusive start menu, from where I could easily hit "r" for run.
I think it's more that it's designed for higher-resolution screens than older OSes. W10 looks fine as a desktop OS, provided you're on a 1080p screen or higher.
Once you've switched it to a non-nauseating theme, it almost doesn't look like total garbage. The default theme is a crime against humanity.
I am not in their target audience, and I'll say why.
First, the layout of windows 10 / windows server 12 (and newer) is, IMHO, a total disjointed eye-gouging mess. It borders on unusable. The interface consistently gets in my way when I want to do things that were very simple in earlier versions of windows (for example starting a command prompt). The default color scheme is so awful it could well be a violation of the Geneva Convention.
Second, their obsession with touchscreens is great for people who don't actually do any real work. Oddly enough I do actual work with my computers, and I find touchscreens to be maddening devices. Why do I want fingerprint smears all over my screen? On top of that a touchscreen is more an impediment to actual work than a tool for it; this mirrors well with my observations that when people are using touchscreens on a laptop they almost without exception are goofing off; they go back to an actual pointing device for actual work.
Third, touchpads are garbage. The Apple touchpad is almost a valid pointing device but only just. Microsoft doesn't want to sell anything with a useful pointing device; users respond by buying mice to use with their Microsoft laptops and tablets.
I know we are not supposed to kill wasps, as they are pollinators and help to control insects
Actually, most wasps in North America - especially more northern states - are not pollinators. They are predators but they don't pollinate anything. And being as they are not limited in their ability to sting (as most bees are) they can be a much more significant threat to humans. In other words, fire away. Get the wasp killer from your local big-box store and go to town. Generally the sites where wasps (especially the exceptionally common paper wasp) build their nests are not attractive nesting sites for any kind of bee, so the collateral damage is generally pretty low.
The exception to the non-pollinating wasps are the wasps that pollinate figs (this is actually why figs are never vegetarian - you can't eat a fig without eating wasp eggs). If you live someplace where figs cannot grow, there is almost no chance that the wasps in your area pollinate anything.
Looking at my reply again, I apologize if it looks like I was trying to come down hard on you, that was not my intention. The emphasis was largely due to the fact that slashdot discussions get closed after a certainly amount of time - and total reader attention (in terms of people reading the discussion) declines quickly as articles fall off the front page as well. I just wanted to make my point more clear since it seemed I had neglected to emphasize it earlier.
The liquidators take liability for disposal, in this case were liquidators appointed, they should be prosecuted for failing to properly dispose of what are by law protected records, especially medical records.
They should, yes. Will they though? Most likely not. They'll point the finger elsewhere and it will quickly be forgotten. After all, it would impede profit to go further.
At the end they're getting paid shit, treated like shit, and they feel like shit. Management often gets canned ahead of time and replaced with management from liquidation outfits, so there is little to no continuity on backend matters. It's unfortunate that it happened but not surprising.
Hopefully the other stores that are being turned into halloween stores are going to do a better job handling the flotsam.
My complaint here - and I may have wandered a bit away from it - is that there is no avenue to follow to take action against spamming and spamvertised domains if they are registered under new gTLDs. The reason for this is that the owners of the top of the new gTLDs don't have any obligation to follow any kind of registration rules for domains in their gTLDs, they can freely take invalid or even empty registration information.
Now, of course we know that many times if you contact a registrar (or registrant) with an abuse complaint, nothing happens. Spam keeps going, the domain stays up, etc. However it is a key starting point if you want to try to take legal action against the spammer, the spamvertised domain owner, or the registrar of either. But when there is no valid contact info, you can't show that you ever attempted to do that. And when the registrar themselves has no valid info, you can't reach out to them either. ICANN has already committed to not being involved, which leaves you with nothing. You just have to accept the spam and deal with it, you can't stop it from coming.
I will add at this point something that I say often but haven't said in this discussion.
Spam is an economic problem
All the filtering in the world won't stop it, spammers will keep finding ways to get around filters. The only way it can be stopped is by stopping the money; spammers will only stop if money isn't coming in. However if you don't have any valid information you can't do anything to interfere with the money flow. This is the road that ICANN is leading us down.
As bad as the SB touchpad may be, I would bet money it's better than the touchpad I've had to deal with lately when helping a colleague who uses an HP laptop. Apparently she ordered a "gaming" laptop from HP as it was the one on the company list under "high performance". That touchpad is so infuriating awful that I won't meet with her unless I have a mouse with me. To make it even worse (as hard as that is to believe) it has a touch screen as well, which I found out by accident once. Why anyone thinks a touch screen is a good idea on a laptop is beyond me; I have yet to see anyone use a touch screen on any device anywhere for serious work, and it often only impedes work.
I know we've said this before, but I think we really have reached the point where the overwhelming majority of users can no longer tell, use, or appreciate an increase in processing speed. It wasn't that long ago that it was necessary to have a cutting edge CPU to do a lot of important end-user tasks. Now I do the majority of my work - which is vastly more computationally intensive than work I did not long ago - on my laptop. This isn't a cutting-edge gaming laptop or workstation replacement laptop either, it is a ThinkPad that I bought for ~$1,000 a few years ago.
Can we make processors even faster yet? Sure. Can we make code even faster too? Certainly. Will most uses notice it? Almost certainly not.
No I didn't mean block a specific one. I meant block the gTLDs that are being generated or rather the reverse Whitelist the country TLDs. I legitimately believe if you do that nothing will break anywhere.
It won't break anything but I doubt it will accomplish what you're after. They will send the spam from a domain that isn't in the spamvertised gTLD (to reduce the chance of detection). Inside the spam will be a link that is obfuscated to look like a traditional.com link. Filtering by new gTLDs - or whitelisting to ignore all of them so you don't need to build a blacklist - won't get rid of those.
The WHOIS database is supposed to have valid contact information (even if obfuscated) for a domain so that it can be contacted in cases of abuse. With the sale of gTLDs that all goes out the window, gTLD owners can put - or omit - whatever they want in that record. Now there is no way to contact a domain owner, and no way to start a paper trail showing that you attempted to contact them. It was hard enough to do anything against prolific spammers (and owners of prolifically spamvertised domains) but now it will get nearly impossible. Couple that to my other comment about the fact that owners no longer have any responsibility if they are under a new gTLD and we have the perfect storm for spammers. And don't pretend that your email can somehow be filtered for these new domains, there is no good way to do that when they can make them at will.
In fact their ability to make new domains - and gTLDs - at will also pushes down the S:N ratio and essentially devalues spam filters that much more.
You're just playing whac-a-mole then. The spammers can buy as many gTLDs as they want and essentially there are no restrictions on what they can be. Block one and another will come up. And how do you propose blocking it anyways? The emails will come from regular domains but they are spamming for domains in new gTLDs, using obfuscated domain names so you can't pick up on it easily. You can't detect a new gTLD in an email if it isn't in there and you probably don't want to block every email with a bit.ly (or similar) link.
ICANN let the fucking foxes into the hen house and told us this is nature's way.
Why does anyone pay ANY attention to ANYTHING from FLORIDA?
Considering the state is overrun with things that want to kill me, eat me, or kill me and eat me (including the weather and the local humans) there is plenty of reason to pay attention to things that come from Florida. Now, whether or not there is any intelligent life in Florida is another question but there is definitely plenty of reason to pay attention to things that come from there.
My opposition to it is that when someone buys a gTLD they become their own registration authority for all domains in that domain and they set what kind of contact information is required for registrants in that range. This makes it the ultimate spammer's (or spamvertised domain owner's) harbor as it can completely remove liability and responsibility. The owner of the gTLD also has authority to hand out arbitrary numbers of domains at their own whim, again making it trivially easy for spammers to bounce around and avoid detection.
And we cannot filter our way out of this, either. We've seen filters get demonstrably worse in recent years as the spammers get better and better at breaking them.
They continue to do what is best for profit, not what is best for users. Sure, this is important but don't think it isn't being driven by profit. At least there is some user benefit to this though, as opposed to their catastrophically awful decision years back to start selling gTLDs.
It's posted to give the slashdot conservatives something to get excited about. Somehow this story will be used to justify more guns in public carried by more people. In other words just another day on drudgedot.
Why does Ticketmaster have a convention? They control something north of 90% of the ticket market in the US; it is nearly impossible to go to a concert or professional sporting event anywhere in this country without them making money off of you. Who are they having a convention with?
This sounds like just a charade they put on to try to convince people that there is competition in this market or that consumers have choice.
Why are you accepting all invitations on there? Are your parents, siblings, old buddies from high school, etc all in the same field you work in? If not then why are they in your linkedin network? Your'e supposed to be building a network on there that helps you get your next job. There is a reason to be selective on who you accept on there; your profile becomes less useful (in terms of how it reflects you) as you add more people who don't have anything to do with your current or next profession.
I have recruiters reach out to me fairly often on LinkedIn, and I see relevant job postings there fairly often (especially if I'm willing to relocate or work remotely). If it's not useful then maybe you should go elsewhere?
By comparison, I've found ladders.com to be pretty damned worthless. I applied to a job there once and then they started sending me info on all kinds of irrelevant postings (I recall they once notified me of an opening at a local railroad switch yard conducting trains). After a while I realized that they did a terrible job of parsing my CV; once I corrected that the FP rate has gone down but so has total volume.
unless you are an an asshole who thinks poor people don't deserve health care
- nobody deserves anything, we only should be getting things that we can pay for, there is no 'deserve' basis, the feeling of 'unfairness' comes from our limbic system, which does not take into account anything else but feelings and while feelings are wonderful and great, they should not be used to form policy. Of-course today so many disagree, they think that policy should totally be based on feelings and not on any rationality or merit or ability to afford something by providing productivity that is at least equivalent to the resources that are being consumed.
Do you deserve the clean Canadian air that you breathe? Do you deserve the well-maintained roads that you traverse to get to work? Do you deserve the expectation of safety provided by the local police? Do you deserve reliable electricity and clean water? Do you deserve access to well educated and intelligent workers for your company? Maybe you should ship off to Afghanistan or Somalia and see how you do when most - or all - of those things are taken away from you.
The ACA (a/k/a national Romneycare) was no one's first choice, at least when it came to the Democrats. I think the Ds wanted a single payer system, but that was too politically unpalatable. You now here rumbles of "Medicare for all".
The democrats - if they had a spine (and we know they do not) - could have passed a single payer system on their own in Obama's first year in office. They didn't need republican support, they had enough of a majority in both chambers that they could have told the republicans to take a hike and just gone for it. But they did not. Was it because they wanted consensus?
I would argue no. They did what they did because they too are owned by the insurance industry. The health insurance industry contributes mightily to campaigns and costs for politicians from both parties to ensure that their agenda never fails. And indeed, it did not fail. Single payer would really only be a disaster for the insurance industry, so the insurance industry rallied their troops to ensure it did not happen.
And if we see a blue wave this year we still won't see the needle move. Even if the democrats won enough seats in both chambers to establish a veto-proof majority (mathematically possible though quite improbable) they still wouldn't do it. Not until the insurance industry is pushed out of Washington will we see it change. It's pretty well impossible for a candidate to launch a serious campaign without the help of the insurance industry, and the insurance industry will always come back to collect on their investment.
I thought the iPhone already came with lots of excess. Or at least it seems to be targeting people who themselves have plenty of excess (money). But now if the phone is called (phonetically) "eye-phone excess" I think that might cause a little confusion.
Slashdot Mirror
Opening a command line in W10 is simply right click the windows menu button (or press Win+X), and click "PowerShell" or "PowerShell (Admin)" (I think there's a setting to replace this with the old-school command line if you really want). Or tap the windows key, then type "cmd" as though it were a command line itself. Or win+R and type "cmd" into the Run menu (it stores history so if a command line was your last command, it's just Win+R, Enter). That last has been how I've opened command lines since XP, the second has been there since I think Vista, and IIRC the first is a new addition (maybe was in W8?).
When I press the windows button, windows redraws my entire damned display with useless icons and grinds to a halt while it tries to predict what I'm typing. We used to push the windows button to pop up a quick an unobtrusive start menu, from where I could easily hit "r" for run.
I think it's more that it's designed for higher-resolution screens than older OSes. W10 looks fine as a desktop OS, provided you're on a 1080p screen or higher.
Once you've switched it to a non-nauseating theme, it almost doesn't look like total garbage. The default theme is a crime against humanity.
I am not in their target audience, and I'll say why.
First, the layout of windows 10 / windows server 12 (and newer) is, IMHO, a total disjointed eye-gouging mess. It borders on unusable. The interface consistently gets in my way when I want to do things that were very simple in earlier versions of windows (for example starting a command prompt). The default color scheme is so awful it could well be a violation of the Geneva Convention.
Second, their obsession with touchscreens is great for people who don't actually do any real work. Oddly enough I do actual work with my computers, and I find touchscreens to be maddening devices. Why do I want fingerprint smears all over my screen? On top of that a touchscreen is more an impediment to actual work than a tool for it; this mirrors well with my observations that when people are using touchscreens on a laptop they almost without exception are goofing off; they go back to an actual pointing device for actual work.
Third, touchpads are garbage. The Apple touchpad is almost a valid pointing device but only just. Microsoft doesn't want to sell anything with a useful pointing device; users respond by buying mice to use with their Microsoft laptops and tablets.
Roundup has been linked to Parkinson's Disease and suspected to be linked to other human neurological diseases as well. Now it looks like it is killing pollinators too. It's probably time to find a better weed killer.
I know we are not supposed to kill wasps, as they are pollinators and help to control insects
Actually, most wasps in North America - especially more northern states - are not pollinators. They are predators but they don't pollinate anything. And being as they are not limited in their ability to sting (as most bees are) they can be a much more significant threat to humans. In other words, fire away. Get the wasp killer from your local big-box store and go to town. Generally the sites where wasps (especially the exceptionally common paper wasp) build their nests are not attractive nesting sites for any kind of bee, so the collateral damage is generally pretty low.
The exception to the non-pollinating wasps are the wasps that pollinate figs (this is actually why figs are never vegetarian - you can't eat a fig without eating wasp eggs). If you live someplace where figs cannot grow, there is almost no chance that the wasps in your area pollinate anything.
Looking at my reply again, I apologize if it looks like I was trying to come down hard on you, that was not my intention. The emphasis was largely due to the fact that slashdot discussions get closed after a certainly amount of time - and total reader attention (in terms of people reading the discussion) declines quickly as articles fall off the front page as well. I just wanted to make my point more clear since it seemed I had neglected to emphasize it earlier.
The liquidators take liability for disposal, in this case were liquidators appointed, they should be prosecuted for failing to properly dispose of what are by law protected records, especially medical records.
They should, yes. Will they though? Most likely not. They'll point the finger elsewhere and it will quickly be forgotten. After all, it would impede profit to go further.
At the end they're getting paid shit, treated like shit, and they feel like shit. Management often gets canned ahead of time and replaced with management from liquidation outfits, so there is little to no continuity on backend matters. It's unfortunate that it happened but not surprising.
Hopefully the other stores that are being turned into halloween stores are going to do a better job handling the flotsam.
My complaint here - and I may have wandered a bit away from it - is that there is no avenue to follow to take action against spamming and spamvertised domains if they are registered under new gTLDs. The reason for this is that the owners of the top of the new gTLDs don't have any obligation to follow any kind of registration rules for domains in their gTLDs, they can freely take invalid or even empty registration information.
Now, of course we know that many times if you contact a registrar (or registrant) with an abuse complaint, nothing happens. Spam keeps going, the domain stays up, etc. However it is a key starting point if you want to try to take legal action against the spammer, the spamvertised domain owner, or the registrar of either. But when there is no valid contact info, you can't show that you ever attempted to do that. And when the registrar themselves has no valid info, you can't reach out to them either. ICANN has already committed to not being involved, which leaves you with nothing. You just have to accept the spam and deal with it, you can't stop it from coming.
I will add at this point something that I say often but haven't said in this discussion.
Spam is an economic problem
All the filtering in the world won't stop it, spammers will keep finding ways to get around filters. The only way it can be stopped is by stopping the money; spammers will only stop if money isn't coming in. However if you don't have any valid information you can't do anything to interfere with the money flow. This is the road that ICANN is leading us down.
As bad as the SB touchpad may be, I would bet money it's better than the touchpad I've had to deal with lately when helping a colleague who uses an HP laptop. Apparently she ordered a "gaming" laptop from HP as it was the one on the company list under "high performance". That touchpad is so infuriating awful that I won't meet with her unless I have a mouse with me. To make it even worse (as hard as that is to believe) it has a touch screen as well, which I found out by accident once. Why anyone thinks a touch screen is a good idea on a laptop is beyond me; I have yet to see anyone use a touch screen on any device anywhere for serious work, and it often only impedes work.
I know we've said this before, but I think we really have reached the point where the overwhelming majority of users can no longer tell, use, or appreciate an increase in processing speed. It wasn't that long ago that it was necessary to have a cutting edge CPU to do a lot of important end-user tasks. Now I do the majority of my work - which is vastly more computationally intensive than work I did not long ago - on my laptop. This isn't a cutting-edge gaming laptop or workstation replacement laptop either, it is a ThinkPad that I bought for ~$1,000 a few years ago.
Can we make processors even faster yet? Sure. Can we make code even faster too? Certainly. Will most uses notice it? Almost certainly not.
No I didn't mean block a specific one. I meant block the gTLDs that are being generated or rather the reverse Whitelist the country TLDs. I legitimately believe if you do that nothing will break anywhere.
It won't break anything but I doubt it will accomplish what you're after. They will send the spam from a domain that isn't in the spamvertised gTLD (to reduce the chance of detection). Inside the spam will be a link that is obfuscated to look like a traditional .com link. Filtering by new gTLDs - or whitelisting to ignore all of them so you don't need to build a blacklist - won't get rid of those.
The WHOIS database is supposed to have valid contact information (even if obfuscated) for a domain so that it can be contacted in cases of abuse. With the sale of gTLDs that all goes out the window, gTLD owners can put - or omit - whatever they want in that record. Now there is no way to contact a domain owner, and no way to start a paper trail showing that you attempted to contact them. It was hard enough to do anything against prolific spammers (and owners of prolifically spamvertised domains) but now it will get nearly impossible. Couple that to my other comment about the fact that owners no longer have any responsibility if they are under a new gTLD and we have the perfect storm for spammers. And don't pretend that your email can somehow be filtered for these new domains, there is no good way to do that when they can make them at will.
In fact their ability to make new domains - and gTLDs - at will also pushes down the S:N ratio and essentially devalues spam filters that much more.
And we cannot filter our way out of this, either.
Block the gTLD.
You're just playing whac-a-mole then. The spammers can buy as many gTLDs as they want and essentially there are no restrictions on what they can be. Block one and another will come up. And how do you propose blocking it anyways? The emails will come from regular domains but they are spamming for domains in new gTLDs, using obfuscated domain names so you can't pick up on it easily. You can't detect a new gTLD in an email if it isn't in there and you probably don't want to block every email with a bit.ly (or similar) link.
ICANN let the fucking foxes into the hen house and told us this is nature's way.
Why does anyone pay ANY attention to ANYTHING from FLORIDA?
Considering the state is overrun with things that want to kill me, eat me, or kill me and eat me (including the weather and the local humans) there is plenty of reason to pay attention to things that come from Florida. Now, whether or not there is any intelligent life in Florida is another question but there is definitely plenty of reason to pay attention to things that come from there.
I also wrote about this in a journal entry back in 2015 when they made the terrible decision to start selling gTLDs , though of course nobody cared then either. I'm pretty sure folks here on drugedot just called me a damned communist at the time, for getting in the way of profit or something. Now they just call me a damned communist anytime I say anything at all.
My opposition to it is that when someone buys a gTLD they become their own registration authority for all domains in that domain and they set what kind of contact information is required for registrants in that range. This makes it the ultimate spammer's (or spamvertised domain owner's) harbor as it can completely remove liability and responsibility. The owner of the gTLD also has authority to hand out arbitrary numbers of domains at their own whim, again making it trivially easy for spammers to bounce around and avoid detection.
And we cannot filter our way out of this, either. We've seen filters get demonstrably worse in recent years as the spammers get better and better at breaking them.
They continue to do what is best for profit, not what is best for users. Sure, this is important but don't think it isn't being driven by profit. At least there is some user benefit to this though, as opposed to their catastrophically awful decision years back to start selling gTLDs.
It's posted to give the slashdot conservatives something to get excited about. Somehow this story will be used to justify more guns in public carried by more people. In other words just another day on drudgedot.
Why does Ticketmaster have a convention? They control something north of 90% of the ticket market in the US; it is nearly impossible to go to a concert or professional sporting event anywhere in this country without them making money off of you. Who are they having a convention with?
This sounds like just a charade they put on to try to convince people that there is competition in this market or that consumers have choice.
Why are you accepting all invitations on there? Are your parents, siblings, old buddies from high school, etc all in the same field you work in? If not then why are they in your linkedin network? Your'e supposed to be building a network on there that helps you get your next job. There is a reason to be selective on who you accept on there; your profile becomes less useful (in terms of how it reflects you) as you add more people who don't have anything to do with your current or next profession.
I have recruiters reach out to me fairly often on LinkedIn, and I see relevant job postings there fairly often (especially if I'm willing to relocate or work remotely). If it's not useful then maybe you should go elsewhere?
By comparison, I've found ladders.com to be pretty damned worthless. I applied to a job there once and then they started sending me info on all kinds of irrelevant postings (I recall they once notified me of an opening at a local railroad switch yard conducting trains). After a while I realized that they did a terrible job of parsing my CV; once I corrected that the FP rate has gone down but so has total volume.
unless you are an an asshole who thinks poor people don't deserve health care
- nobody deserves anything, we only should be getting things that we can pay for, there is no 'deserve' basis, the feeling of 'unfairness' comes from our limbic system, which does not take into account anything else but feelings and while feelings are wonderful and great, they should not be used to form policy. Of-course today so many disagree, they think that policy should totally be based on feelings and not on any rationality or merit or ability to afford something by providing productivity that is at least equivalent to the resources that are being consumed.
Do you deserve the clean Canadian air that you breathe? Do you deserve the well-maintained roads that you traverse to get to work? Do you deserve the expectation of safety provided by the local police? Do you deserve reliable electricity and clean water? Do you deserve access to well educated and intelligent workers for your company? Maybe you should ship off to Afghanistan or Somalia and see how you do when most - or all - of those things are taken away from you.
We gave the iPhone Xs to Xzibit so you can phone with your phone while you phone, dawg. Just wait till you see what we do with your keyboard.
The ACA (a/k/a national Romneycare) was no one's first choice, at least when it came to the Democrats. I think the Ds wanted a single payer system, but that was too politically unpalatable. You now here rumbles of "Medicare for all".
The democrats - if they had a spine (and we know they do not) - could have passed a single payer system on their own in Obama's first year in office. They didn't need republican support, they had enough of a majority in both chambers that they could have told the republicans to take a hike and just gone for it. But they did not. Was it because they wanted consensus?
I would argue no. They did what they did because they too are owned by the insurance industry. The health insurance industry contributes mightily to campaigns and costs for politicians from both parties to ensure that their agenda never fails. And indeed, it did not fail. Single payer would really only be a disaster for the insurance industry, so the insurance industry rallied their troops to ensure it did not happen.
And if we see a blue wave this year we still won't see the needle move. Even if the democrats won enough seats in both chambers to establish a veto-proof majority (mathematically possible though quite improbable) they still wouldn't do it. Not until the insurance industry is pushed out of Washington will we see it change. It's pretty well impossible for a candidate to launch a serious campaign without the help of the insurance industry, and the insurance industry will always come back to collect on their investment.
I thought the iPhone already came with lots of excess. Or at least it seems to be targeting people who themselves have plenty of excess (money). But now if the phone is called (phonetically) "eye-phone excess" I think that might cause a little confusion.