I can't think of a single reason for requiring all users to use the same client. If people *want* to use Outlook, you already allow them to do so (although I might reconsider allowing *that* client at all).
How can forcing everyone onto a single interface be a good thing? The email client should be completely user-selected, so long as it (1) supports standards, and (2) doesn't open security risks.
My site went through a similar nightmare, but instead of Exchange/Outlook, they went to Lotus Notes. Previously, different divisions used differnt email systems. I work in a unix (Solaris) division and everyone used whatever clients they wanted (I use exmh). Eventually, my division replaced all the NCDs with NT machines. I now use Exceed and my desktop is still 100% unix. I run exactly two NT applications: Exceed and Winamp. I can't stay logged on for 6 months at a time anymore, but I like the music.
The other divisions used CC:mail. CC:mail is evil incarnate. Mime attachments generally didn't work very well between us and the CC:mail folks because CC:mail wasn't a real RFC-822 mail package and had some kludgey gateway to talk to real mail servers. CC:mail also had Y2K problems, so management decided to ditch CC:mail once and for all.
Unfortunately, management never realized that all the attachment woes were 100% CC:mail's fault. So they decided that they would force everyone to use the same client. The search went on, and the Lotus Notes group put on the most impressive sales presentation. Marketing won.
Fortunately, Notes does support IMAP and I use fetchmail and continue to read my email with exmh, though this is against the policy. F the policy, I say. I've got work to do.
BTW: Lotus Notes was later determined to have a Y2K bug...
It's gonna be awfully hard for MS to convince a judge that they think the RBL is a violation of their corporate rights when, in fact, MS is a MAPS subsriber.
> do you think that the IT people want to fuck around for hours on end trying to get a simple Windowing env. to work?
In my business environment, they fuck around for hours getting Windows (NT) to work. Then fuck around for several more hours trying to lock it down so the users can't do anything to break it. Then they still have to worry that people won't fill their C: drives with MP3s (which can cause SMS updates to break when they run out of space).
Once they've got everything as they like, they just ghost it to all the other machines. It's just as easy to clone/lockdown under Linux.
And, BTW, I installed KDE2 on Tuesday on my Debian machine. apt-get did all the work, including handling dependencies & building menus for all the packages on my system.
After all these years of doing everything in their power to stop encryption via export regs and Clipper & friends, the US government is *finally* doing something to encourage the use of encryption. Good on them!
Yeah, I was kinda disappointed when I saw it, too. I was expecting a huge mural with each palm contributing an integral element. Not a bunch of individual crappy scribbles that join together to make... nothing.
I think you've misinterpreted the Constitution. Article VI is actually used to *avoid* passing unconstitutional laws by simply signing treaties. Because a treaty is made part of the "law of the land," it is also subject to Constitutional constraints on what can be part of the law of the land. The First Amendment is one such Constitutional requirement that this treaty would not be reconcilable with.
Every law that Congress passes is part of the "law of the land," but that doesn't stop the Supreme Court from being the final arbitrator of what is Constitutionally permissable.
First, the press release was from NeoMedia not DC. So yes, of course, it sounded positive.
Second, I'd just like to point out to everyone that I am all-knowing in that I foresaw this some time ago (actually, Stephen Satchell is the guru, but I think I deserve some points for spotting the guru). Specifically, under a previous/. story (http://slashdot.org/articles/00/09/28/1351255.sht ml) I wrote:
Theory of DC legal action (Score:3, Interesting)
by Col. Klink (retired) (wklink@yahoo.com) on Thursday September 28, @01:38PM EDT (#49)
(User #11632 Info)
Saw on flyingbuttmonkeys:
Step hen Satchell's theory behind the DC letters. Basically, DC is only going after barcode to web translations, not simply cuecat decoders. Even though DC has refused to answer what their "intellectual property" is, their letters have gone exclusively to sites that have software that can let you use your cat with the web. Satchell further points out that NeoMedia Technologies, not DC, actually have a patent on barcode to web lookups. NeoMedia is sitting on the patent until, I guess, there is enough money being made to jump in and begin extorting licensing fees...
Re:Getting Past the Censorware with Long Ip's
on
Mandated Mediocrity
·
· Score: 2
> The only problem with that method is that you can't follow links.
Well, I don't live under censor ware, but if I did...
Write your own proxy filter that automagically translates domain names into their long-number and then pass it to the censorous proxy.
Alright, I'll drop the (perfectly-justified) "fear the government" argument and give you a practical reason why the government should stop now: the only reason people filed honestly was because they *thought* their responses were confidential.
Even with all the "legal" privacy protections, the Census still had trouble getting responses from those that didn't trust them. If they openly and blatantly violate that promise now, they can pretty much be sure that all future data collected will be useless.
The Census complained that all those Republicans that were questioning the long-form were responsible for less turnout than they predicted...
They want to correlate with voluntary surveys that were filled out with assurances of privacy. Do you think those respondents (or any others) will fill out another voluntary survey?
"Its" citizens? "ITS" citizens??? Fuck you. I don't belong to the government, the government belongs to me.
But if you must know, governments should not be able to track "its" citizens because of the history of government abuses. While the US decried to horrors of Nazi Germany rounding up the Jews, the US rounded up Japanese... with information from the Census.
Hitler didn't have anything like the detailed information on "his" citizens that the US has today. The Nazis kept records of suspected Jews in shoeboxes.
If a neo-fascist came to power in the US and decided to implement a final solution, having a nice cross referenced database like this would be invaluable.
You can't say "it can't happen here" when it already did once before.
"To establish legal tender." Putting all that funny green ink on a piece of paper makes that paper "worth" something. It could also be used to describe converting gov't securities into currency (which can then be used to by real goods and services).
Many nations have "monetized" their debt. That is to say, they simply started printing money to pay off their debts (resulting in tremendous inflation).
It seems like monetize is being adopted as the latest buzz word. I think they think it means "to convert into money." Press Releases that fete that they are "monetizing" their assets mean that either they are going to sell the assets or use them to make something that will, eventualy, make money.
If a company is going to "monetize their mission-critical implementation with bleeding-edge, next-generation functionality and leverage their position," I'd guess that they are going to sell a new piece of software and hope to make profit.
Yes, NSI is stupidly holding on to valuable domain names that they will sell at auction. If they were intelligent, they'd let their competition sell the old domain names.
Ralph Nader and Gore advisor Reed Hundt (former FCC chairman) have been having a back-and-forth on Wired.
In Nader's latest, he really sounds like a slashdotter. He takes what I consider to be all the stands on open access to information while criticizing Gore for taking money from Vance Opperman (former CEO of West Publishing who claim to "own" all the legal opinions in the U.S.) and doing nothing to support open-source:
Nader points out that while Gore did in fact play a prominent role in early public investment of the internet, he has "coasted on his earlier deeds, [and] he has actively pushed for a new approach to the Internet as something that is far less public."
It's a great debate and really highlights how pitiful the "presidential debates" are when they leave out third party candidates.
Reed never really addresses Nader's arguments and just attacks Bush...
> The government isn't always out to screw us, people.
True enough. It isn't *always* doing that. But you can't ignore the historical fact that the gov't did indeed set out to screw people like Martin Luther King.
This bill gives the gov't more than enough power to slap down anyone that ever tries to oppose it. You can't say "won't happen here" because it already did happen here. Nixon had an enemies list, but he didn't have the technology to review every god damned web page his opponents looked at...
He insists that the gov't wants an honest review. I must wonder why, then, the gov't insisted on retaining the right to alter or withhold the final report.
If the DOJ *really* wants an honest review, why maintain the right to turn it into a whitewash?
The article implies that they may claim that they are still evaluating results and try and keep it quiet. But what about the $10K award winners? How can you give out the money and not admit they lost?
> But it is a different string than the one I see when I do it from a console term.
The cat first sends an "Alt-F10". Under a console, this will likely do nothing unless you run a lot of gettys. Under X, the xterm might be trying to do something with it. Try hitting Alt-F10 with your keyboard and see if you see the same nonsense that's getting in your way. You can create a ~/.inputrc to trap those characters (see readline(3) man page for details; the characters generated by Alt and F10 can be distro specific).
Your web browser should ignore Alt-F10, so you should be able to scan into any of the Cat-aware web decoders w/out trouble.
First, you really shouldn't hot-swap anything on your PS/2 ports (mouse/keyboard). Shut down first.
Second, it sounds like you plugged your cat into the mouse port instead of the keyboard. Once plugged in properly, it should work under X or anywhere else. You don't really need *any* drivers. You should be able to go to an xterm and scan something and see some "encrypted" string spew forth. There are web pages (http://www.jounce.net/~maarken/decode.html) that can decode the cat such that you don't need any driver/decoder on your end at all.
Third, no, you can never ever turn off that red light.
So I should no longer need to use my credit card to verify my age (Yahoo! made me do that to use my spam-trap email account). Now I can just digitally "sign" an affirmation of my age, right?
Everyone knows that credit cards are not proof of age, but they use them anyways because it covers their ass, legal-wise. With "e-signatures" given the full force of law, they should be able to point to this law and use an "e-signature" form post button to prove your age with just as much ass-covering legaility.
Slashdot Mirror
I can't think of a single reason for requiring all users to use the same client. If people *want* to use Outlook, you already allow them to do so (although I might reconsider allowing *that* client at all).
How can forcing everyone onto a single interface be a good thing? The email client should be completely user-selected, so long as it (1) supports standards, and (2) doesn't open security risks.
My site went through a similar nightmare, but instead of Exchange/Outlook, they went to Lotus Notes. Previously, different divisions used differnt email systems. I work in a unix (Solaris) division and everyone used whatever clients they wanted (I use exmh). Eventually, my division replaced all the NCDs with NT machines. I now use Exceed and my desktop is still 100% unix. I run exactly two NT applications: Exceed and Winamp. I can't stay logged on for 6 months at a time anymore, but I like the music.
The other divisions used CC:mail. CC:mail is evil incarnate. Mime attachments generally didn't work very well between us and the CC:mail folks because CC:mail wasn't a real RFC-822 mail package and had some kludgey gateway to talk to real mail servers. CC:mail also had Y2K problems, so management decided to ditch CC:mail once and for all.
Unfortunately, management never realized that all the attachment woes were 100% CC:mail's fault. So they decided that they would force everyone to use the same client. The search went on, and the Lotus Notes group put on the most impressive sales presentation. Marketing won.
Fortunately, Notes does support IMAP and I use fetchmail and continue to read my email with exmh, though this is against the policy. F the policy, I say. I've got work to do.
BTW: Lotus Notes was later determined to have a Y2K bug...
It's gonna be awfully hard for MS to convince a judge that they think the RBL is a violation of their corporate rights when, in fact, MS is a MAPS subsriber.
Wow, that's interesting. I had not heard about the Brits doing a study! I wonder where I could learn more about such a study...
> do you think that the IT people want to fuck around for hours on end trying to get a simple Windowing env. to work?
In my business environment, they fuck around for hours getting Windows (NT) to work. Then fuck around for several more hours trying to lock it down so the users can't do anything to break it. Then they still have to worry that people won't fill their C: drives with MP3s (which can cause SMS updates to break when they run out of space).
Once they've got everything as they like, they just ghost it to all the other machines. It's just as easy to clone/lockdown under Linux.
And, BTW, I installed KDE2 on Tuesday on my Debian machine. apt-get did all the work, including handling dependencies & building menus for all the packages on my system.
> to prevent unscrupulous people from skewing the data.
And what is to prevent the vendor from being the unscrupulous one?
After all these years of doing everything in their power to stop encryption via export regs and Clipper & friends, the US government is *finally* doing something to encourage the use of encryption. Good on them!
Yeah, I was kinda disappointed when I saw it, too. I was expecting a huge mural with each palm contributing an integral element. Not a bunch of individual crappy scribbles that join together to make... nothing.
I think you've misinterpreted the Constitution. Article VI is actually used to *avoid* passing unconstitutional laws by simply signing treaties. Because a treaty is made part of the "law of the land," it is also subject to Constitutional constraints on what can be part of the law of the land. The First Amendment is one such Constitutional requirement that this treaty would not be reconcilable with.
Every law that Congress passes is part of the "law of the land," but that doesn't stop the Supreme Court from being the final arbitrator of what is Constitutionally permissable.
First, the press release was from NeoMedia not DC. So yes, of course, it sounded positive.
/. story (http://slashdot.org/articles/00/09/28/1351255.sht ml) I wrote:
Second, I'd just like to point out to everyone that I am all-knowing in that I foresaw this some time ago (actually, Stephen Satchell is the guru, but I think I deserve some points for spotting the guru). Specifically, under a previous
Theory of DC legal action (Score:3, Interesting)
by Col. Klink (retired) (wklink@yahoo.com) on Thursday September 28, @01:38PM EDT (#49)
(User #11632 Info)
Saw on flyingbuttmonkeys:
Step hen Satchell's theory behind the DC letters. Basically, DC is only going after barcode to web translations, not simply cuecat decoders. Even though DC has refused to answer what their "intellectual property" is, their letters have gone exclusively to sites that have software that can let you use your cat with the web. Satchell further points out that NeoMedia Technologies, not DC, actually have a patent on barcode to web lookups. NeoMedia is sitting on the patent until, I guess, there is enough money being made to jump in and begin extorting licensing fees...
> The only problem with that method is that you can't follow links.
Well, I don't live under censor ware, but if I did...
Write your own proxy filter that automagically translates domain names into their long-number and then pass it to the censorous proxy.
Alright, I'll drop the (perfectly-justified) "fear the government" argument and give you a practical reason why the government should stop now: the only reason people filed honestly was because they *thought* their responses were confidential.
Even with all the "legal" privacy protections, the Census still had trouble getting responses from those that didn't trust them. If they openly and blatantly violate that promise now, they can pretty much be sure that all future data collected will be useless.
The Census complained that all those Republicans that were questioning the long-form were responsible for less turnout than they predicted...
They want to correlate with voluntary surveys that were filled out with assurances of privacy. Do you think those respondents (or any others) will fill out another voluntary survey?
"Its" citizens? "ITS" citizens??? Fuck you. I don't belong to the government, the government belongs to me.
But if you must know, governments should not be able to track "its" citizens because of the history of government abuses. While the US decried to horrors of Nazi Germany rounding up the Jews, the US rounded up Japanese... with information from the Census.
Hitler didn't have anything like the detailed information on "his" citizens that the US has today. The Nazis kept records of suspected Jews in shoeboxes.
If a neo-fascist came to power in the US and decided to implement a final solution, having a nice cross referenced database like this would be invaluable.
You can't say "it can't happen here" when it already did once before.
> Anyhow, what does "monetize" mean?
"To establish legal tender." Putting all that funny green ink on a piece of paper makes that paper "worth" something. It could also be used to describe converting gov't securities into currency (which can then be used to by real goods and services).
Many nations have "monetized" their debt. That is to say, they simply started printing money to pay off their debts (resulting in tremendous inflation).
It seems like monetize is being adopted as the latest buzz word. I think they think it means "to convert into money." Press Releases that fete that they are "monetizing" their assets mean that either they are going to sell the assets or use them to make something that will, eventualy, make money.
If a company is going to "monetize their mission-critical implementation with bleeding-edge, next-generation functionality and leverage their position," I'd guess that they are going to sell a new piece of software and hope to make profit.
Yes, NSI is stupidly holding on to valuable domain names that they will sell at auction. If they were intelligent, they'd let their competition sell the old domain names.
"Follow the money."
Ralph Nader and Gore advisor Reed Hundt (former FCC chairman) have been having a back-and-forth on Wired.
, 00.html
In Nader's latest, he really sounds like a slashdotter. He takes what I consider to be all the stands on open access to information while criticizing Gore for taking money from Vance Opperman (former CEO of West Publishing who claim to "own" all the legal opinions in the U.S.) and doing nothing to support open-source:
http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,39295
Nader points out that while Gore did in fact play a prominent role in early public investment of the internet, he has "coasted on his earlier deeds, [and] he has actively pushed for a new approach to the Internet as something that is far less public."
It's a great debate and really highlights how pitiful the "presidential debates" are when they leave out third party candidates.
Reed never really addresses Nader's arguments and just attacks Bush...
> The government isn't always out to screw us, people.
True enough. It isn't *always* doing that. But you can't ignore the historical fact that the gov't did indeed set out to screw people like Martin Luther King.
This bill gives the gov't more than enough power to slap down anyone that ever tries to oppose it. You can't say "won't happen here" because it already did happen here. Nixon had an enemies list, but he didn't have the technology to review every god damned web page his opponents looked at...
He insists that the gov't wants an honest review. I must wonder why, then, the gov't insisted on retaining the right to alter or withhold the final report.
If the DOJ *really* wants an honest review, why maintain the right to turn it into a whitewash?
The article implies that they may claim that they are still evaluating results and try and keep it quiet. But what about the $10K award winners? How can you give out the money and not admit they lost?
Are you free to answer questions posted here, or does the FBI review your answers first?
> But it is a different string than the one I see when I do it from a console term.
The cat first sends an "Alt-F10". Under a console, this will likely do nothing unless you run a lot of gettys. Under X, the xterm might be trying to do something with it. Try hitting Alt-F10 with your keyboard and see if you see the same nonsense that's getting in your way. You can create a ~/.inputrc to trap those characters (see readline(3) man page for details; the characters generated by Alt and F10 can be distro specific).
Your web browser should ignore Alt-F10, so you should be able to scan into any of the Cat-aware web decoders w/out trouble.
First, you really shouldn't hot-swap anything on your PS/2 ports (mouse/keyboard). Shut down first.
Second, it sounds like you plugged your cat into the mouse port instead of the keyboard. Once plugged in properly, it should work under X or anywhere else. You don't really need *any* drivers. You should be able to go to an xterm and scan something and see some "encrypted" string spew forth. There are web pages (http://www.jounce.net/~maarken/decode.html) that can decode the cat such that you don't need any driver/decoder on your end at all.
Third, no, you can never ever turn off that red light.
So I should no longer need to use my credit card to verify my age (Yahoo! made me do that to use my spam-trap email account). Now I can just digitally "sign" an affirmation of my age, right?
Everyone knows that credit cards are not proof of age, but they use them anyways because it covers their ass, legal-wise. With "e-signatures" given the full force of law, they should be able to point to this law and use an "e-signature" form post button to prove your age with just as much ass-covering legaility.
Off topic? The topic is legal MP3s. Brainkick hosts free MP3s for unsigned bands. What aspect is not part of the topic?
> Can someone make a CueCat icon?
Not without being sued by DC for violating their trademark...
I put up a few of my ow n songs on Brainkick Media's server.