Even worse, I've been scratching my head, trying to get 2.6.10 to work.
Until recently, I was running, compiling 2.4.x kernels with no problem; I then moved to FC3, and for the first time, was using 2.6.x kernels, and first time using grub.
2.6.10 builds for me, and everything. I build the kernels, build and install the modules, and since I have SCSI, I run initrd; I add the kernel and initrd.img line to my grub.conf. However, I still get a kernel panic telling me that it can't find the system at boot...? I have checked and triple-checked my grub.conf -- it's pointing to the right files. Regardless, doesn't work, even when I rebuild with SCSI builtin, as opposed to a module. Doesn't make any sense at all.
Regardless, I'm compiling 2.6.11 as I type this...:P.
... first thing any alien is gonna learn, is that we're all racist people who can't drive, hate fat people, and love oral sex.
(Not kidding you - check out the RnR section of just about any Craigslist).
Re:Not sure I agree with all of the article
on
QA != Testing
·
· Score: 1
That's at least partially a dev problem then; sounds to me like the stuff was not even unit tested before it was "thrown over the fence" to QA.
But you're right in one respect - QA engineers are -- or at least should be -- more than test monkeys.
Can't tell you how many times I worked with people, people on a "Senior" level, who knew very little about systems as a whole, or even the QA process - they just had been there long enough to know how to circumnavigate the idiosyncracies of the systems that were tested... that, and they had learned how to just STFU and take whatever answer dev gave them.
I haven't had it installed lately because my adblock does a pretty good job of blocking flash that I don't want to see, but flashblock is what I used to use... it blocks out flash until you click on it to view.
Isn't this what Stevie Wonder has, w/r/t the pigmentosa? Furthermore, I seem to remember them talking about the possibility a couple of years ago that he would be a candidate for something similar, with a microchip.
I'd imagine that his condition has degenerated far too much along to be aided by this, but if I recall correctly, they nonetheless said he might be a candidate for something similar. I don't think they ended up using him, however.
This wasn't done with a long exposure photograph, however. I was actually going to try to get a neat photo of the series of signs over there on the left, when we stopped at that light. The green one then came on, but the red never turned off.
After a bit of head-scratching, we finally figured it was safe to go, and drove off.
I dumped AT&T a few months ago due to very poor customer service and because AT&T had absurdly high rates for international calling when I travel (calls from New Zealand to the US were something like $8.00/minute with AT&T)
Best thing to do is to obtain an unlocked phone.
I bought an unlocked phone on ebay recently; While on layover in MIA, en route to Curaçao a few weeks ago, I was told by ATTWS that calls to the US from Curaçao would be $1.69/minute.
It wasn't long before I found a phone shop down there, bought a prepaid SIM and was able to make calls to the US at a much more reasonable rate of 35c/min.
My wife (boy, it feels strange to say that) is from Canada, and before we got married, I used to call up there all the time. I recently renewed my contract w/ ATTWS, because as recently as Sept., ATTWS was the only mobile provider I could find that offered a plan allowing the user toll-free calling to.ca and no roaming while there, either. I didn't want to renew after the merger, and risk not having that option available to me.
It used to be an extra $20 a month, then when I switched to GSM, they'd lowered it to $10. Now I think it's only like $7/mo, which is a real bargain. I think it's called their "North America" plan or something, now.
Just a heads up for those who might find such a service useful. I've been asking for a few months now at both ATTWS and Cingular stores whether the new company would offer a similar plan, but no one knew for sure.
My name is Ikembe Otobamo. Until recently I was employed by the large software firm Microsoft. During this time, I earned many stock options and sold them at a great profit. During my time at Microsoft, I also began developing a linux distribution called 'Ubuntu'.
When Microsoft discovered I was using Linux, I was quickly dismissed from the firm. Unfortunately, that also meant I had no work authorisation and had to flee the United States.
Meanwhile, I have accumulated over $16 million USD due to stock sales, and I thus need s bank account in the United States to hold this money for safekeeping. If you would be so willing to help me, I offer you 10% of this money and interest incurred. I will also supply you with unlimited copies of my "Ubuntu Linux" distribution for your own perusal. This distribution also contains our specialised "Mozilatobe" browser suite and our "Gnombolo" X11 interface.
Please consider my offer; your assistance will be most appreciated.
Everyone who tells me I haven't lost any freedoms under Bush gets this little tale.
I November, I sold my old condo and bought a townhouse; in doing so, I banked some of the profits. A few months later, I decide to open a bank account with a new bank, and move most of my money there. I call up the bank, try to move the aforementioned $$$. Oops, looks like I can't do that, without making a certified, trackable bank check that I'd have to pay extra for. This was due to new legislation in the Patriot Act that limits the amounts of money one can move in a day.
As it stood, my only other option was to move a max of $5000/day.
Is this a huge issue? Well, it wasn't terribly consequential to me, because I wasn't in a huge hurry to move that money, but it sure was a fucking hassle -- and it is certainly an anecdote that is indicative of how the Patriot Act affects you and me, in addition to any terrorists.
While they say that Kerry did pull a man out of the water, there were other boats that were feet away that were going to save him. However, they were not under enemy fire and the reason Kerry's boat was there first was because Kerry ran when they came under fire.
According to American History Magazine,
"Thurlow was struggling to get PCF-3's wounded gunner out of his hole and onto the deck when the damaged Swift ran aground hard on a shoal on the right side of the river, sending Thurlow somersaulting into the water. At the same moment, the five Swifts came under fire from the right side again, and Kerry remembered thinking that was it -- they were going to get completely cut off and annihilated in a crossfire."
Larry Thurlow is one of these bankrolled swiftboat veterans who is accusing Kerry of getting his medals illegitimately.
Kerry and the other wounded men received medical attention aboard a Coast Guard cutter, which was the closest ship capable of treating them. Along with a third Purple Heart for the injury to his right arm, Kerry was also awarded a Bronze Star for his bravery, as was Larry Thurlow.
Interesting, then... if Kerry doesn't deserve his Bronze Star, then what can we say about Thurlow's?
I'd have to disagree, at least from my perspective.
I was sick of Verizon continually giving me the run--around concerning DSL in this area, changing their story on me all the time, so I sent them the letter you'll see there in the first link. I told them that if they couldn't get their story straight, they weren't going to retain my local phone business, either.
I never heard back from them.
Meanwhile, looking for new carriers... I don't need anything on my land line except for unlimited local calling. No LD, no VM, no CID, etc... none of that stuff. This said, ATT had the least expensive flat rate I could find out there, next to Verizon; others that were otherwise inexpensive only offered packages with the aforementioned nickel and dime services that couldn't be removed.
If you want an absolutely bare bones phone service for cheap, go with ATT; they're one of the few that will do that for you, and do it pretty inexpensively. If you need anything else, though, I would look somewhere else.
it's not a matter of "right" or "wrong", as much as the Fox numbers are consistently skewed away from just about every poll out there. Nevermind CNN, Gallup and many others fall within a certain range, and the Fox numbers generally fall way outside that range.
http://www.radiofreemonkey.com:8080/charts/img_b us h_disapproval.gif http://www.radiofreemonkey.com: 8080/charts/img_bus h.gif
That isn't to say that others are way high on the other end - Zogby is also generally way outside the range, on the high side.
In the end, I find it a lot more hard to fathom that virtually every polling organisation out there is set up to destroy Bush. The chance that Fox is doing just the opposite -- or at least, the population sample that Fox is using to poll -- speaks for itself. To have numbers that fall that far out of range with the other data points -- something is fishy.
The best evidence I have found of Fox News' bias is right here. In the polls, which network/organisation consistently shows Bush with the lowest disapproval rating? FOX. Lowest disapproval on job rating? FOX. It is true that their scores on the positive side of things, while a little high, aren't too skewed from anything else. However, their polls show an obvious aversion to negative numbers for Bush.
So I can only think of two reasons, off the top of my head, why this might happen.
1) They're purposely manipulating the numbers (unlikely) 2) They consistently have a skewed population from which to draw polls (likely)
If number two is likely - why is this happening? Do they only cater to the right? Are they only polling people who tend to watch FOX? Is this on purpose or incidental? I don't know, but it's pretty glaringly obvious that FOX has some polling numbers that are a bit off, and I'd be real interested in finding out why.
Site worked for me; when I had javascript enabled, sure enough, it forwarded me to the "you are blocked page", but when I unchecked the js option in my Firefox toolbar, clicked on URL, it didn't/couldn't forward me, and I got to see the content just fine.
Slashdot Mirror
... and we can be sure that Mr. Pretenderle will be chasing down those young linux whippersnappers in his beloved Ferrari.
Even worse, I've been scratching my head, trying to get 2.6.10 to work.
:P.
Until recently, I was running, compiling 2.4.x kernels with no problem; I then moved to FC3, and for the first time, was using 2.6.x kernels, and first time using grub.
2.6.10 builds for me, and everything. I build the kernels, build and install the modules, and since I have SCSI, I run initrd; I add the kernel and initrd.img line to my grub.conf. However, I still get a kernel panic telling me that it can't find the system at boot...? I have checked and triple-checked my grub.conf -- it's pointing to the right files. Regardless, doesn't work, even when I rebuild with SCSI builtin, as opposed to a module. Doesn't make any sense at all.
Regardless, I'm compiling 2.6.11 as I type this...
... first thing any alien is gonna learn, is that we're all racist people who can't drive, hate fat people, and love oral sex.
(Not kidding you - check out the RnR section of just about any Craigslist).
That's at least partially a dev problem then; sounds to me like the stuff was not even unit tested before it was "thrown over the fence" to QA.
But you're right in one respect - QA engineers are -- or at least should be -- more than test monkeys.
Can't tell you how many times I worked with people, people on a "Senior" level, who knew very little about systems as a whole, or even the QA process - they just had been there long enough to know how to circumnavigate the idiosyncracies of the systems that were tested... that, and they had learned how to just STFU and take whatever answer dev gave them.
I haven't had it installed lately because my adblock does a pretty good job of blocking flash that I don't want to see, but
flashblock is what I used to use... it blocks out flash until you click on it to view.
Isn't this what Stevie Wonder has, w/r/t the pigmentosa? Furthermore, I seem to remember them talking about the possibility a couple of years ago that he would be a candidate for something similar, with a microchip.
I'd imagine that his condition has degenerated far too much along to be aided by this, but if I recall correctly, they nonetheless said he might be a candidate for something similar. I don't think they ended up using him, however.
...the local online rag is talking about the fact that Jeremy Jaynes' bond has been set at $1M. But concerning the "harsh sentence" thing, yes, as stupid as it sounds, a lot of people think it is harsh.
It's education, all over again... people don't realise that "if you don't like it, just delete it" is a totally bogus answer.
I am not sure whether you have tried it or not, but have you used the Context Highlight extension?
This wasn't done with a long exposure photograph, however. I was actually going to try to get a neat photo of the series of signs over there on the left, when we stopped at that light. The green one then came on, but the red never turned off.
After a bit of head-scratching, we finally figured it was safe to go, and drove off.
Are they seeing the same ones that I saw when I was there? ;).
I dumped AT&T a few months ago due to very poor customer service and because AT&T had absurdly high rates for international calling when I travel (calls from New Zealand to the US were something like $8.00/minute with AT&T)
Best thing to do is to obtain an unlocked phone.
I bought an unlocked phone on ebay recently; While on layover in MIA, en route to Curaçao a few weeks ago, I was told by ATTWS that calls to the US from Curaçao would be $1.69/minute.
It wasn't long before I found a phone shop down there, bought a prepaid SIM and was able to make calls to the US at a much more reasonable rate of 35c/min.
My wife (boy, it feels strange to say that) is from Canada, and before we got married, I used to call up there all the time. I recently renewed my contract w/ ATTWS, because as recently as Sept., ATTWS was the only mobile provider I could find that offered a plan allowing the user toll-free calling to .ca and no roaming while there, either. I didn't want to renew after the merger, and risk not having that option available to me.
It used to be an extra $20 a month, then when I switched to GSM, they'd lowered it to $10. Now I think it's only like $7/mo, which is a real bargain. I think it's called their "North America" plan or something, now.
Just a heads up for those who might find such a service useful. I've been asking for a few months now at both ATTWS and Cingular stores whether the new company would offer a similar plan, but no one knew for sure.
Dear Sir,
My name is Ikembe Otobamo. Until recently I was employed by the large software firm Microsoft. During this time, I earned many stock options and sold them at a great profit. During my time at Microsoft, I also began developing a linux distribution called 'Ubuntu'.
When Microsoft discovered I was using Linux, I was quickly dismissed from the firm. Unfortunately, that also meant I had no work authorisation and had to flee the United States.
Meanwhile, I have accumulated over $16 million USD due to stock sales, and I thus need s bank account in the United States to hold this money for safekeeping. If you would be so willing to help me, I offer you 10% of this money and interest incurred. I will also supply you with unlimited copies of my "Ubuntu Linux" distribution for your own perusal. This distribution also contains our specialised "Mozilatobe" browser suite and our "Gnombolo" X11 interface.
Please consider my offer; your assistance will be most appreciated.
Sincerely,
Ikembe Otobamo (Nigeria)
Well, I am sure it would be plenty satisfying to just respond with your very own, "Pei! Pei! Pei pei pei pei!"
Potentially ethnocentric mods: this makes sense, it's not just jibberish.
Everyone who tells me I haven't lost any freedoms under Bush gets this little tale.
I November, I sold my old condo and bought a townhouse; in doing so, I banked some of the profits. A few months later, I decide to open a bank account with a new bank, and move most of my money there. I call up the bank, try to move the aforementioned $$$. Oops, looks like I can't do that, without making a certified, trackable bank check that I'd have to pay extra for. This was due to new legislation in the Patriot Act that limits the amounts of money one can move in a day.
As it stood, my only other option was to move a max of $5000/day.
Is this a huge issue? Well, it wasn't terribly consequential to me, because I wasn't in a huge hurry to move that money, but it sure was a fucking hassle -- and it is certainly an anecdote that is indicative of how the Patriot Act affects you and me, in addition to any terrorists.
According to American History Magazine,
Larry Thurlow is one of these bankrolled swiftboat veterans who is accusing Kerry of getting his medals illegitimately.
Interesting, then... if Kerry doesn't deserve his Bronze Star, then what can we say about Thurlow's?
(borrowed from DailyKos.com's story)
Oops, I meant Thurlow, the guy who was accusing Kerry of being dishonest. Thurlow , busted.
Also, more interesting information about the swiftboat veterans.
Not to mention that Rassman has been caught in his own lies about the whole incident.
Does anyone remember the Stale.com website that came out shortly after MS's "Slate" came out?
I'd have to disagree, at least from my perspective.
I was sick of Verizon continually giving me the run--around concerning DSL in this area, changing their story on me all the time, so I sent them the letter you'll see there in the first link. I told them that if they couldn't get their story straight, they weren't going to retain my local phone business, either.
I never heard back from them.
Meanwhile, looking for new carriers... I don't need anything on my land line except for unlimited local calling. No LD, no VM, no CID, etc... none of that stuff. This said, ATT had the least expensive flat rate I could find out there, next to Verizon; others that were otherwise inexpensive only offered packages with the aforementioned nickel and dime services that couldn't be removed.
If you want an absolutely bare bones phone service for cheap, go with ATT; they're one of the few that will do that for you, and do it pretty inexpensively. If you need anything else, though, I would look somewhere else.
Hmmmm....
The Simpsons live on Evergreen Terrace...
The mirror is at Evergreen.edu...
Do I sense a CONSPIRACY?
(probably not)
it's not a matter of "right" or "wrong", as much as the Fox numbers are consistently skewed away from just about every poll out there. Nevermind CNN, Gallup and many others fall within a certain range, and the Fox numbers generally fall way outside that range.
b us h_disapproval.gif: 8080/charts/img_bus h.gif
http://www.radiofreemonkey.com:8080/charts/img_
http://www.radiofreemonkey.com
That isn't to say that others are way high on the other end - Zogby is also generally way outside the range, on the high side.
In the end, I find it a lot more hard to fathom that virtually every polling organisation out there is set up to destroy Bush. The chance that Fox is doing just the opposite -- or at least, the population sample that Fox is using to poll -- speaks for itself. To have numbers that fall that far out of range with the other data points -- something is fishy.
The best evidence I have found of Fox News' bias is right here.
In the polls, which network/organisation consistently shows Bush with the lowest disapproval rating? FOX. Lowest disapproval on job rating? FOX. It is true that their scores on the positive side of things, while a little high, aren't too skewed from anything else. However, their polls show an obvious aversion to negative numbers for Bush.
So I can only think of two reasons, off the top of my head, why this might happen.
1) They're purposely manipulating the numbers (unlikely)
2) They consistently have a skewed population from which to draw polls (likely)
If number two is likely - why is this happening? Do they only cater to the right? Are they only polling people who tend to watch FOX? Is this on purpose or incidental? I don't know, but it's pretty glaringly obvious that FOX has some polling numbers that are a bit off, and I'd be real interested in finding out why.
Well, that's certainly what Mr. Pretenderle seems to think.
I hope someone frames that diatribe for posterity. I think it might well rank up there, eventually, with the likes of "Dewey Defeats Truman".
Site worked for me; when I had javascript enabled, sure enough, it forwarded me to the "you are blocked page", but when I unchecked the js option in my Firefox toolbar, clicked on URL, it didn't/couldn't forward me, and I got to see the content just fine.