Funnily enough, the linux version of skype also has no ads while the windows version does. Google desktop linux is strictly opt-in on indexed folders while on windows you'd have to opt-out. Know your audience, i guess.
Since America is more powerful than Iraq/Afghanistan, it's really more like the bully pounding the kid's face into the pavement (hundreds of thousands dead, billions of dollars lost) due to a prank played on him.
Seeing as how bullying is so prevalent, you'd think this behavior evolved because it's mostly effective. And yeah, overpunishing is a natural way to align incentives. There's numerous examples, but it's probably worst in politics. Many politicans can lose their jobs because of something small & unrelated like a slip of the tongue or an affair.
Physicists, and to a lesser extent astronomers, have a real problem starting with the assumption that the universe may be populated by species which have evolved there technology and intelligence to the limits allowed by physical laws...
Huh?? Why in Zeus' name would you start out from that assumption when there's no evidence for it at all?
Most of the inflammatory or just plain stupid stuff belongs to kdawson. I've been keeping a rough tally since zebras/aadvarks & he doesn't disappoint.
this.
"Anathem" Exclusive Video At MySpace - kdawson, this is news?
Idle: User Charged With Taking ISP Tech Hostage - samzenpus
Stanford's "Autonomous" Helicopters Learn - kdawson - just had to add that bit on "autonomous"
Idle: Bottom of the Barrel Book Reviews -- Special Operations Team Raptor - samzenpus
How HP Could Turn a Novelty Into a Revolution - kdawson
Microsoft Patents "Pg Up" and "Pg Dn" - kdawson
Zebras Get Less Spam Than Aardvarks - kdawson
Reminds me of the kdawsonfud tag a while back. He does post decent stuff half of the time, but they could get rid of almost all the crap by dragging him out back. The cynic in me thinks flamebait is good for pageviews & ad impressions.
GPL is like herpes. An example: if you use a GPL library with one line of code (LOC) in it and compile it into your one billion LOC application then your bigger application gets the GPL herpes virus and will then have to be released as GPL (if and when you choose to release it).
Likewise, Vista's license (do not redistribute or we raep u up the bum) is also like herpes. If you somehow get the Vista source & and compile one line of code into your one billion LOC application then you can't redistribute the two without getting raped up the bum.
All licenses have conditions. You abide by them, or you gtfo.
TringMe is extremely popular in China and we have a large number of paying customers in China including a Chinese social network with 3 million users using TringMe's API & services.'"
I played around with this applet a few months ago. After some practice, getting out & hitting the ball becomes easy. Getting back in is only slightly harder & I still can't hit the point reliably.
(Maybe IE8 will fix all that. Maybe not. We'll see)
It can't. All the people who were going to upgrade have already done so. IE8 isn't gonna change that any more than IE7 did. A more popular vista might have helped.
This case is different because the checksum is known. The birthday problem is about the probability of at least 1 collision given a certain group size. Given a good uniform n-bit hash, it'll take 2^n tries to collide against a given value, and sqrt(2^n) tries to find a random pair of colliding values. According to wiki, ZFS uses 256-bit checksums.
It's more common than you'd think. For example, it is a little known fact that Ms Spears is an expert in semiconductor physics. And the president himself knows a few things about high energy physics.
Making life intentionally difficult for commercial closed software vendors isn't going to help the cause of open source, nor will it help Linux as a platform. If anything it will cause large companies to avoid it because political crap takes precedence over everything else.
If what I just said was "political crap" then I don't know what isn't. It should be easy to understand as quid-pro-quo - I prefer contributing to software that gives me more in return. The state of linux is now such that I don't need anyproprietary software so I'm free to choose FLOSS. I'm sure many feel the same way, but you're welcome to join the LSB4 team & try convince us otherwise.
FOSS software should be beating proprietary software on its own merits. If you want open source stuff to succeed you make better software, and if the bazaar development method is better that should be easy.
However, stacking the deck against commercial interests in an attempt to make the entire platform GPL or even just open source (of any license) isn't going to help anyone.
That's ironic because this example of "stacking the deck" is an advantage of the bazaar development method. Like it or not, free software encourages rampant forking/extending & the only thing keeping us from the UNIX situation is that improvements/software will be ported. If they are free. Of course non-free software will have a harder time.
Neglecting proprietary software now makes you a zealot? Hey sign me up, because I actually prefer to contribute to software that I'm free to run/modify/distribute. Weird concept, I know.
And btw, GP didn't say GPL-only. There are many free-software licenses, as everyone including the FSF will tell you.
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
(x) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(x) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
(x) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
(x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
(x) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
(x) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
(x) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
( ) Extreme profitability of spam
(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever
been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
(x) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
I can't get over the feeling that he gets his major points (not so) subtly wrong in ways that are not worth rehashing. For example look at his Fallacy of Choice. Even conceding that choice is Bad, how does he expect us to stop people from forking according to their needs/preferences? Because there's only one way & that's to lock it down like OSX but he knows how well that'll go over so all he talks about is mainstream acceptance. And there is a LAMP of the desktop, it's called ubuntu.
Slashdot Mirror
Funnily enough, the linux version of skype also has no ads while the windows version does. Google desktop linux is strictly opt-in on indexed folders while on windows you'd have to opt-out. Know your audience, i guess.
Since America is more powerful than Iraq/Afghanistan, it's really more like the bully pounding the kid's face into the pavement (hundreds of thousands dead, billions of dollars lost) due to a prank played on him.
Seeing as how bullying is so prevalent, you'd think this behavior evolved because it's mostly effective. And yeah, overpunishing is a natural way to align incentives. There's numerous examples, but it's probably worst in politics. Many politicans can lose their jobs because of something small & unrelated like a slip of the tongue or an affair.
I hope they enjoy their moment in the sun, because they'll soon be in over their heads.
Unlike Skylab, I'm sure China consulted the Japanese Agriculture Ministry.
Huh?? Why in Zeus' name would you start out from that assumption when there's no evidence for it at all?
Most of the inflammatory or just plain stupid stuff belongs to kdawson. I've been keeping a rough tally since zebras/aadvarks & he doesn't disappoint.
this.
"Anathem" Exclusive Video At MySpace - kdawson, this is news?
Idle: User Charged With Taking ISP Tech Hostage - samzenpus
Stanford's "Autonomous" Helicopters Learn - kdawson - just had to add that bit on "autonomous"
Idle: Bottom of the Barrel Book Reviews -- Special Operations Team Raptor - samzenpus
How HP Could Turn a Novelty Into a Revolution - kdawson
Microsoft Patents "Pg Up" and "Pg Dn" - kdawson
Zebras Get Less Spam Than Aardvarks - kdawson
Reminds me of the kdawsonfud tag a while back. He does post decent stuff half of the time, but they could get rid of almost all the crap by dragging him out back. The cynic in me thinks flamebait is good for pageviews & ad impressions.
Likewise, Vista's license (do not redistribute or we raep u up the bum) is also like herpes. If you somehow get the Vista source & and compile one line of code into your one billion LOC application then you can't redistribute the two without getting raped up the bum.
All licenses have conditions. You abide by them, or you gtfo.
He wasn't exactly trying to hide it.
That analogy is subtly wrong. Identity in SSH is built in, usually as passwords. What use is encryption if you don't know who you're talking to?
I played around with this applet a few months ago. After some practice, getting out & hitting the ball becomes easy. Getting back in is only slightly harder & I still can't hit the point reliably.
That was completely uncalled for. What has Computerworld done to deserve being compared to kdawson?
All OSS licenses are equal, but some are more equal than others ...
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
So like windows, norton & storm? They hate each other way more than they hate you.
It can't. All the people who were going to upgrade have already done so. IE8 isn't gonna change that any more than IE7 did. A more popular vista might have helped.
This case is different because the checksum is known. The birthday problem is about the probability of at least 1 collision given a certain group size. Given a good uniform n-bit hash, it'll take 2^n tries to collide against a given value, and sqrt(2^n) tries to find a random pair of colliding values. According to wiki, ZFS uses 256-bit checksums.
It's more common than you'd think. For example, it is a little known fact that Ms Spears is an expert in semiconductor physics. And the president himself knows a few things about high energy physics.
If what I just said was "political crap" then I don't know what isn't. It should be easy to understand as quid-pro-quo - I prefer contributing to software that gives me more in return. The state of linux is now such that I don't need anyproprietary software so I'm free to choose FLOSS. I'm sure many feel the same way, but you're welcome to join the LSB4 team & try convince us otherwise.
That's ironic because this example of "stacking the deck" is an advantage of the bazaar development method. Like it or not, free software encourages rampant forking/extending & the only thing keeping us from the UNIX situation is that improvements/software will be ported. If they are free. Of course non-free software will have a harder time.
Neglecting proprietary software now makes you a zealot? Hey sign me up, because I actually prefer to contribute to software that I'm free to run/modify/distribute. Weird concept, I know.
And btw, GP didn't say GPL-only. There are many free-software licenses, as everyone including the FSF will tell you.
It's the optimal strategy for the prisoner's dilemma. Note one of the main points.
Well what do you expect? From TFA, he holds the record for moonwalking - nine hours and 17 minutes. You can see what it did to Michael Jackson...
Have you seen the list of recent changes? That's the surest sign of a dead wiki.
Your post advocates a
(x) technical ( ) legislative ( ) market-based ( ) vigilante
approach to fighting spam. Your idea will not work. Here is why it won't work. (One or more of the following may apply to your particular idea, and it may have other flaws which used to vary from state to state before a bad federal law was passed.)
( ) Spammers can easily use it to harvest email addresses
( ) Mailing lists and other legitimate email uses would be affected
( ) No one will be able to find the guy or collect the money
( ) It is defenseless against brute force attacks
(x) It will stop spam for two weeks and then we'll be stuck with it
(x) Users of email will not put up with it
( ) Microsoft will not put up with it
( ) The police will not put up with it
(x) Requires too much cooperation from spammers
(x) Requires immediate total cooperation from everybody at once
( ) Many email users cannot afford to lose business or alienate potential employers
( ) Spammers don't care about invalid addresses in their lists
( ) Anyone could anonymously destroy anyone else's career or business
Specifically, your plan fails to account for
( ) Laws expressly prohibiting it
(x) Lack of centrally controlling authority for email
( ) Open relays in foreign countries
( ) Ease of searching tiny alphanumeric address space of all email addresses
( ) Asshats
( ) Jurisdictional problems
( ) Unpopularity of weird new taxes
( ) Public reluctance to accept weird new forms of money
(x) Huge existing software investment in SMTP
(x) Susceptibility of protocols other than SMTP to attack
(x) Willingness of users to install OS patches received by email
(x) Armies of worm riddled broadband-connected Windows boxes
( ) Eternal arms race involved in all filtering approaches
( ) Extreme profitability of spam
(x) Joe jobs and/or identity theft
( ) Technically illiterate politicians
( ) Extreme stupidity on the part of people who do business with spammers
( ) Dishonesty on the part of spammers themselves
( ) Bandwidth costs that are unaffected by client filtering
( ) Outlook
and the following philosophical objections may also apply:
(x) Ideas similar to yours are easy to come up with, yet none have ever been shown practical
( ) Any scheme based on opt-out is unacceptable
( ) SMTP headers should not be the subject of legislation
( ) Blacklists suck
( ) Whitelists suck
( ) We should be able to talk about Viagra without being censored
( ) Countermeasures should not involve wire fraud or credit card fraud
( ) Countermeasures should not involve sabotage of public networks
(x) Countermeasures must work if phased in gradually
( ) Sending email should be free
( ) Why should we have to trust you and your servers?
( ) Incompatiblity with open source or open source licenses
( ) Feel-good measures do nothing to solve the problem
( ) Temporary/one-time email addresses are cumbersome
( ) I don't want the government reading my email
( ) Killing them that way is not slow and painful enough
Furthermore, this is what I think about you:
(x) Sorry dude, but I don't think it would work.
( ) This is a stupid idea, and you're a stupid person for suggesting it.
( ) Nice try, assh0le! I'm going to find out where you live and burn your house down!
I can't get over the feeling that he gets his major points (not so) subtly wrong in ways that are not worth rehashing. For example look at his Fallacy of Choice. Even conceding that choice is Bad, how does he expect us to stop people from forking according to their needs/preferences? Because there's only one way & that's to lock it down like OSX but he knows how well that'll go over so all he talks about is mainstream acceptance. And there is a LAMP of the desktop, it's called ubuntu.
To put this in /. terms, Red Hat's got good karma. Contributing to the community for over a decade kinda does that.