A soldier's job is first and foremost to protect civilians, whether those civilians be your own people or the other guy's. Yes, soldiers daily risk their own lives to protect the "other side"'s civilians. That is exactly what the job is about.
Please reconcile your statement with any of the events listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history. Very few of these were perpetrated by Americans, most were by or with the support of soldiers.
The second hit that Google turns up for "oo 65536 rows" is http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Calc/hacks/number_of_rows, which shows you how to increase the limits for both rows and columns and tells you what breaks if you do. At least one person has increased the limits to 2 000 000 rows and 32 000 columns, resulting in a bottom-right cell address of AUHT2000000.
For everyone defending the existing patent system, just a heads up from someone who has actually tried to start a business selling a "new" product: anything you can think of, there is a patent on some aspect of it. For instance, consider mixing two substances together. For example, you want to make a hot ham and cheese sandwich? Hint: it's patented.
1. A microwaveable grilled cheese sandwich comprising toasted bread and cheese, the cheese being coated on all of its surfaces with an edible moisture barrier, [...]
Despite it's title, the patent isn't for a hot ham and cheese sandwich, it's for coating the cheese so the sandwich doesn't turn to mush before it's sold.
1. Individual author writes a very good, but not widely recognized book. Sales are mediocre, but this is mostly due to publicity issues.
2. Movie studio X bets that they can produce a blockbuster film based on this book. They go to the author to try and negotiate movie rights, but since copyright is only five years, they never offer more than a pittance. Negotiations fall through.
3. Movie studio X actually begins production of the film 3 years into the copyright of the book, and finishes just as the 5 year copyright is expiring. The movie becomes a blockbuster, and studio X sucks up all the profits, while not handing a penny to the author.
I'm not sure getting rid of either entirely would be the best option but I don't see much use of limits being longer than five years.
Here's a scenario for you and the rest of/.:
1. Individual author writes a very good, but not widely recognized book. Sales are mediocre, but this is mostly due to publicity issues.
2. Movie studio X bets that they can produce a blockbuster film based on this book. They go to the author to try and negotiate movie rights, but since copyright is only five years, they never offer more than a pittance. Negotiations fall through.
3. Movie studio X actually begins production of the film 3 years into the copyright of the book, and finishes just as the 5 year copyright is expiring. The movie becomes a blockbuster, and studio X sucks up all the profits, while not handing a penny to the author.
This is just something to think about.
You left out a step.
4. Torrents for the movie show up the Monday after it opens. Despite strong opening weekend, Studio X winds up losing money and goes bankrupt. Author enjoys feeling of schadenfreude.
Why don't we outlaw the wheel, then? I'm sure that will force the market to come up with all sorts of creative alternatives. We'll probably waste billions of dollars in the process, but at least we'll be promoting "innovation"! Isn't that what's important, after all?
I've always wanted to own a hovercraft. This is just the sort of out-of-the-box thinking we need to make that dream a reality!
The summary says "The final goal is a manned (!) low-orbital flight." However, the name of the outfit is Copenhagen Suborbitals. I suspect that the summary is wrong, and these guys are trying for an X-Prize mission: straight up 100 km and then back down again.
I used DSorganize with my DS. It's a full-featured PDA with an integrated browser. If you do get it, the best version is 3.1129. The developer got upset about something, released a buggy 3.2 version, and dropped development. It's closed source freeware, so don't expect any patches but 3.1129 has always worked for everything I've needed.
So... this gives Mars approximately 600 million years to come up with "some" form of life before its magnetosphere stopped working (because after that, the environment probably became very inhospitable). Considering it took earth 2.2 billion years to create life...
By my math, 4.6e9 - 3.2e9 = 0.8 billion years for life to appear on Earth.
we are gambling that Mars had life sooner than Earth?
Would it even be possible for a planet to have life on it within 500 million years of its creation? From what I understand, Earth was awfully uninhabitable to life in its first billion years (fire and brimstone kinda stuff, Venus like). Why would Mars be any different?
First, the Moon was formed 4.5e9 years ago; that event presumably reheated the Earth's crust, so it's more accurate to say that life took 0.7e9 years to appear. Also, since Mars is much smaller than the Earth, it would cool more quickly, reaching temperature conducive to life faster than the Earth. Combining those two fact, 600 million years seems quite reasonable.
Duncan, I've used the GPLv2 for over twenty years for software that I've written for customers. 99% of it was in the form of shell or other scripts, which meant that withholding the source wasn't an option. The primary change that I make is to not use the words "Gnu Public License", because that tends to scare people.
The first two freedoms that Stallman lists are important to anyone. The remaining two are more theoretical. My customers have the ability to redistribute the code as they see fit. However, they just paid a lot of money for something that gives them a competitive advantage. Why would they give that advantage to their competitors for free? They could sell it, but they aren't in the software business. Selling it would be a bigger hassle than it's worth. Finally, the software is licensed to the company, not its employees or contractors. I generally add a preface to the license that says, "This software is the property of Blue Sun Corporation, and may not be redistributed under the terms of this license without the permission of their legal department."
If Firefox ran faster in Wine than in native Windows, that would be great news. As it is, it's undoubtedly because Firefox's code is optimized for Windows, rather than Linux.
Most of the farms I'm familiar with have a colony of cats living in each barn. Each colony gets a fixed ration of food each day, and no, none of the cats have ever been "fixed". Those cats will chase anything they think they can eat.
Why should the government favor rural voters over city voters?
What's so magical about one person, one vote? Personally, I'd prefer one acre, one vote. Let me quote http://www.jonathantweet.com/jotpoliticsrural.html on the differences between rural and urban culture, with a couple of comments where I disagree.
Rural culture comes from an environment that is primarily natural, while urban culture comes from an environment that is primarily artificial.
In a natural environment, your choices are your own. It's up to you to decide which trees to cut, which mines to dig, which fish to catch, and which crops to plant. Your challenges are weather, wildlife, and the natural elements. So are your resources. The lifestyle fosters a sense of independence, epitomized in the image of the pioneer. [[I'd like to note that rural dwellers are much more interested in the conservation of resources that urban dwellers. The large corporations that ruin the environment are owned and operated by urban dwellers.]]
In an artificial environment, your choices are contributions to group choices. Urban careers depend on other people. Laborers need employers, lawyers need clients, retailers need buyers, and bankers needs borrowers. Your challenges are competition from other people. Your resources are also other people. The lifestyle fosters a sense of interdependence.
In a natural environment, the rules are God's rules. It's not up to you how long the seasons are, where lodes of minerals are located, or what wildlife lives where. Laws are nature's laws.
In an artificial environment, the rules are humans' rules. Zoning codes, labor laws, interest rates, and traffic laws are human inventions. Laws are human, relativist laws.
In a rural culture, citizens want to be left alone. Regulations, such as environmental laws, are intrusions. In an artificial culture, regulations are inevitable. Urban culture is impossible without regulations, so the urban issue is which regulations we should live under. [[Again, rural dwellers *are* interested in preserving the environment, but they also understand that rules can't be "one size fits all". They know that their children will inherit any messes. Again, it's the corporations that try to maximize their profits by not cleaning up after themselves.]]
Government initiatives, such as universal health care, make sense in urban culture. In the urban culture, good government is about prudent interdependence. In rural culture, which values independence, these same initiatives are intrusions. Income tax makes sense in urban culture. Urban economy is an artificial construct. Paying to maintain that construct is reasonable. Income tax makes less sense to rural culture. Rural economy is natural, not an artificial construct. The natural environment doesn't need revenue to sustain it.
Gore won handily nationwide. Not a massive mandate, but enough that nobody would seriously expect to dredge up enough votes to change the election.
The difference between Gore and Bush was one-half of one per cent. In at least four states (CO, FL, MN, PA), that's enough to trigger an automatic recount.
You seem to be mistaking me for someone else. I never said that Exchange was in some privileged position wrt SOX. By this point in time, any enterprise email system that's being used by US publicly traded corporations may be assumed to meet those requirements. I'm fairly certain that IBM, Sun and Google eat their own dogfood, so there's three solutions right there.
Nor did I say that the technical requirements were mysterious. It's fairly simple to put a filter on an email gateway and have everything going in or out archived in real-time.
No, the problems are social. Since your auditors are going to be on the hook for those million dollar fines, I suspect that they'll want more than a few minutes of explanation of how your home-grown solution works; I know that I would. Just telling them, "We use Lotus Notes with the IronMail SOX add-on" will take the better part of a day, because they'll want to see proof that you're telling the truth. How much longer will it take to prove that your home-made system doesn't, for example, secretly delete emails sent to and from your personal broker?
Sigh... I didn't want to grab the tar baby, but I guess I have to.
Sarbanes-Oxley applies to all publicly traded companies and the CPA's and attorneys associated with these companies. This makes everyone involved very paranoid about compliance; people generally go too far rather than risk not going far enough. The big section is #802. It presents a possible fine of up to $1,000,000 dollars or a prison sentence of up to 20 years for any person who destroys, alters, mutilates or conceals any electronic document in an official investigation. It also specifies minimum retention periods for all accounting records, work papers, communications, file attachments and documents whether transmitted via email, instant messaging or other message modes.
So, first you have to capture all emails, even those that are instantly deleted by the recipient, so just running nightly backups won't cut the mustard. Everything that gets captured has to be archived in a way that lets you prove that the copy hasn't been altered. This generally means writing everything to write-once media, such at DVD-R, or you can generate cryptographic hashes of the messages and write just those and the message headers to write-once media; you'd still need to save the message itself somewhere, but you could use r/w media. Data de-duplication is important, too, so that you don't wind up storing a few hundred copies of this week's hotest Internet meme. "Concealing" also covers not being able to find an email on request, so being able to search everything is important; storing a copy of everything on DVD will be too slow, so you need to use hard drives for this part.
Your auditor and attorneys have to certify that you're compliant, subject to the same penalties, so you need to prove to them that your solution works. This is where networking effects come into play: once your vendor proves to your auditor that their solution works, every other customer of that auditor can use that same package without doing all the legwork. Linus agrees that there are places where unalterable code can be a good thing, and this is one of those places.
John C Dvorak argues that SOX compliance is putting a huge drag on the economy, and I tend to agree, but until the laws are changed, I wouldn't call it FUD.
I play a little guitar. I'm certainly no Hendrix or Santana, but I can play. It didn't take years and years of hard, painful practice either (well, hence why I'm neither Hendrix nor Santana, both of them did actually do just that, besides having exceptional talent, IMO), I just played and, over time, I got better.
Exceptional talent may not be that important. "Many accounts of the development of expertise emphasise that it comes about through long periods of deliberate practice. In many domains of expertise estimates of 10 years experience or 10,000 hours deliberate practice are common. Typically recent research on expertise emphasises the nurture side of the nature versus nurture argument." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert
The NYT review of "Outliers" makes good reading on this subject, as well. Not everyone agrees with Malcolm Gladwell's thoughts on the subject, but he argues that talent is the third most important factor in success, behind practice and luck (being in the right place at the right time).
Sarbanes-Oxley applies to the USA only. 95% of the world's population don't give a damn about Sarbanes-Oxley.
So, what? 75% of the world's population don't give a damn about email, so 79% of the world's email users do give a damn about Sarbanes-Oxley. (Here's the math: US population = 0.3e9, world population = 6.7e9, world email users = 1.2e9. Thus the US population is 4.5% of the world's, a little less than your estimate, but still pretty close.)
Actually, the 79% is totally bogus, I just divided 75% by 95%. According to http://www.internetworldstats.com/top20.htm, the US has 15% of the world's Internet users. If we assume that everyone using the Internet also uses email and that everyone in the US gives a damn about SOX (since it's a US law, even if it doesn't effect them directly), then you're still too low by a factor of three.
Finally, I haven't seen any figures but I'd assume that most of the entities using Exchange are US businesses. Private individuals are much more likely to be using either webmail or email systems provided by their ISP; I've never heard of either using Exchange as a back end (no, not even Hotmail). And SOX compliance is more than just archiving. You need to be able to produce subsets of your email when requested, etc. Finally, you need to prove to your auditors that you are doing everything in an approved manner.
In conclusion, I'd say that SOX compliance is very important to the majority of those entities that own Exchange.
Slashdot Mirror
A soldier's job is first and foremost to protect civilians, whether those civilians be your own people or the other guy's. Yes, soldiers daily risk their own lives to protect the "other side"'s civilians. That is exactly what the job is about.
Please reconcile your statement with any of the events listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history. Very few of these were perpetrated by Americans, most were by or with the support of soldiers.
The second hit that Google turns up for "oo 65536 rows" is http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Calc/hacks/number_of_rows, which shows you how to increase the limits for both rows and columns and tells you what breaks if you do. At least one person has increased the limits to 2 000 000 rows and 32 000 columns, resulting in a bottom-right cell address of AUHT2000000.
For everyone defending the existing patent system, just a heads up from someone who has actually tried to start a business selling a "new" product: anything you can think of, there is a patent on some aspect of it. For instance, consider mixing two substances together. For example, you want to make a hot ham and cheese sandwich? Hint: it's patented.
http://www.patentgenius.com/patent/7226629.html
Go re-read your link:
What is claimed is:
1. A microwaveable grilled cheese sandwich comprising toasted bread and cheese, the cheese being coated on all of its surfaces with an edible moisture barrier, [...]
Despite it's title, the patent isn't for a hot ham and cheese sandwich, it's for coating the cheese so the sandwich doesn't turn to mush before it's sold.
Here's a scenario for you and the rest of /.:
1. Individual author writes a very good, but not widely recognized book. Sales are mediocre, but this is mostly due to publicity issues.
2. Movie studio X bets that they can produce a blockbuster film based on this book. They go to the author to try and negotiate movie rights, but since copyright is only five years, they never offer more than a pittance. Negotiations fall through.
3. Movie studio X actually begins production of the film 3 years into the copyright of the book, and finishes just as the 5 year copyright is expiring. The movie becomes a blockbuster, and studio X sucks up all the profits, while not handing a penny to the author.
This is just something to think about.
You do realize that you've just described the American publication history of the Lord of the Rings, don't you? Except that the end result wasn't quite what you imagined. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lord_of_the_Rings#Editions_and_revisions
I'm not sure getting rid of either entirely would be the best option but I don't see much use of limits being longer than five years.
Here's a scenario for you and the rest of /.:
1. Individual author writes a very good, but not widely recognized book. Sales are mediocre, but this is mostly due to publicity issues.
2. Movie studio X bets that they can produce a blockbuster film based on this book. They go to the author to try and negotiate movie rights, but since copyright is only five years, they never offer more than a pittance. Negotiations fall through.
3. Movie studio X actually begins production of the film 3 years into the copyright of the book, and finishes just as the 5 year copyright is expiring. The movie becomes a blockbuster, and studio X sucks up all the profits, while not handing a penny to the author.
This is just something to think about.
You left out a step.
4. Torrents for the movie show up the Monday after it opens. Despite strong opening weekend, Studio X winds up losing money and goes bankrupt. Author enjoys feeling of schadenfreude.
Why don't we outlaw the wheel, then? I'm sure that will force the market to come up with all sorts of creative alternatives. We'll probably waste billions of dollars in the process, but at least we'll be promoting "innovation"! Isn't that what's important, after all?
I've always wanted to own a hovercraft. This is just the sort of out-of-the-box thinking we need to make that dream a reality!
The summary says "The final goal is a manned (!) low-orbital flight." However, the name of the outfit is Copenhagen Suborbitals. I suspect that the summary is wrong, and these guys are trying for an X-Prize mission: straight up 100 km and then back down again.
I used DSorganize with my DS. It's a full-featured PDA with an integrated browser. If you do get it, the best version is 3.1129. The developer got upset about something, released a buggy 3.2 version, and dropped development. It's closed source freeware, so don't expect any patches but 3.1129 has always worked for everything I've needed.
How has nobody in this thread mentioned the N810's built in GPS?
I agree. The built-in GPS can really come in handy when you get lost back in the stacks.
Put them in a pouch or tin. Keeps all the cruft out too (if the tin had sweets in, wash it first!).
Now you tell me! I was keeping my microSD cards in an Altoids tin. Then one day I reached for a mint and swallowed 8gb instead.
But at least you can get off the train, right? Right?
Not if you're Charlie!
M.T.A. Video with soundtrack of the Kingston Trio recording
I thought that those were the ideograms for male and female.
According to the following link, life started on earth 3.8 billion years ago:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_evolution
According to the following link our solar system is about 4.6 billion years old:
http://www.universetoday.com/guide-to-space/the-solar-system/how-old-is-the-solar-system/
So... this gives Mars approximately 600 million years to come up with "some" form of life before its magnetosphere stopped working (because after that, the environment probably became very inhospitable). Considering it took earth 2.2 billion years to create life...
By my math, 4.6e9 - 3.2e9 = 0.8 billion years for life to appear on Earth.
we are gambling that Mars had life sooner than Earth?
Would it even be possible for a planet to have life on it within 500 million years of its creation? From what I understand, Earth was awfully uninhabitable to life in its first billion years (fire and brimstone kinda stuff, Venus like). Why would Mars be any different?
First, the Moon was formed 4.5e9 years ago; that event presumably reheated the Earth's crust, so it's more accurate to say that life took 0.7e9 years to appear. Also, since Mars is much smaller than the Earth, it would cool more quickly, reaching temperature conducive to life faster than the Earth. Combining those two fact, 600 million years seems quite reasonable.
Duncan, I've used the GPLv2 for over twenty years for software that I've written for customers. 99% of it was in the form of shell or other scripts, which meant that withholding the source wasn't an option. The primary change that I make is to not use the words "Gnu Public License", because that tends to scare people.
The first two freedoms that Stallman lists are important to anyone. The remaining two are more theoretical. My customers have the ability to redistribute the code as they see fit. However, they just paid a lot of money for something that gives them a competitive advantage. Why would they give that advantage to their competitors for free? They could sell it, but they aren't in the software business. Selling it would be a bigger hassle than it's worth. Finally, the software is licensed to the company, not its employees or contractors. I generally add a preface to the license that says, "This software is the property of Blue Sun Corporation, and may not be redistributed under the terms of this license without the permission of their legal department."
If Firefox ran faster in Wine than in native Windows, that would be great news. As it is, it's undoubtedly because Firefox's code is optimized for Windows, rather than Linux.
Didn't we just get over discussing the other day how wikipedia is not a valid reference?
Sorry, your post doesn't count, because you didn't provide any supporting references.
Most of the farms I'm familiar with have a colony of cats living in each barn. Each colony gets a fixed ration of food each day, and no, none of the cats have ever been "fixed". Those cats will chase anything they think they can eat.
Why should the government favor rural voters over city voters?
What's so magical about one person, one vote? Personally, I'd prefer one acre, one vote. Let me quote http://www.jonathantweet.com/jotpoliticsrural.html on the differences between rural and urban culture, with a couple of comments where I disagree.
Rural culture comes from an environment that is primarily natural, while urban culture comes from an environment that is primarily artificial.
In a natural environment, your choices are your own. It's up to you to decide which trees to cut, which mines to dig, which fish to catch, and which crops to plant. Your challenges are weather, wildlife, and the natural elements. So are your resources. The lifestyle fosters a sense of independence, epitomized in the image of the pioneer. [[I'd like to note that rural dwellers are much more interested in the conservation of resources that urban dwellers. The large corporations that ruin the environment are owned and operated by urban dwellers.]]
In an artificial environment, your choices are contributions to group choices. Urban careers depend on other people. Laborers need employers, lawyers need clients, retailers need buyers, and bankers needs borrowers. Your challenges are competition from other people. Your resources are also other people. The lifestyle fosters a sense of interdependence.
In a natural environment, the rules are God's rules. It's not up to you how long the seasons are, where lodes of minerals are located, or what wildlife lives where. Laws are nature's laws.
In an artificial environment, the rules are humans' rules. Zoning codes, labor laws, interest rates, and traffic laws are human inventions. Laws are human, relativist laws.
In a rural culture, citizens want to be left alone. Regulations, such as environmental laws, are intrusions. In an artificial culture, regulations are inevitable. Urban culture is impossible without regulations, so the urban issue is which regulations we should live under. [[Again, rural dwellers *are* interested in preserving the environment, but they also understand that rules can't be "one size fits all". They know that their children will inherit any messes. Again, it's the corporations that try to maximize their profits by not cleaning up after themselves.]]
Government initiatives, such as universal health care, make sense in urban culture. In the urban culture, good government is about prudent interdependence. In rural culture, which values independence, these same initiatives are intrusions. Income tax makes sense in urban culture. Urban economy is an artificial construct. Paying to maintain that construct is reasonable. Income tax makes less sense to rural culture. Rural economy is natural, not an artificial construct. The natural environment doesn't need revenue to sustain it.
Gore won handily nationwide. Not a massive mandate, but enough that nobody would seriously expect to dredge up enough votes to change the election.
The difference between Gore and Bush was one-half of one per cent. In at least four states (CO, FL, MN, PA), that's enough to trigger an automatic recount.
Yeah I don't understand why you need to file for a patent at all. [...] Can protocols even be patented?
Microsoft says, "Yes!" http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc224428(PROT.10).aspx
You seem to be mistaking me for someone else. I never said that Exchange was in some privileged position wrt SOX. By this point in time, any enterprise email system that's being used by US publicly traded corporations may be assumed to meet those requirements. I'm fairly certain that IBM, Sun and Google eat their own dogfood, so there's three solutions right there.
Nor did I say that the technical requirements were mysterious. It's fairly simple to put a filter on an email gateway and have everything going in or out archived in real-time.
No, the problems are social. Since your auditors are going to be on the hook for those million dollar fines, I suspect that they'll want more than a few minutes of explanation of how your home-grown solution works; I know that I would. Just telling them, "We use Lotus Notes with the IronMail SOX add-on" will take the better part of a day, because they'll want to see proof that you're telling the truth. How much longer will it take to prove that your home-made system doesn't, for example, secretly delete emails sent to and from your personal broker?
Sigh... I didn't want to grab the tar baby, but I guess I have to.
Sarbanes-Oxley applies to all publicly traded companies and the CPA's and attorneys associated with these companies. This makes everyone involved very paranoid about compliance; people generally go too far rather than risk not going far enough. The big section is #802. It presents a possible fine of up to $1,000,000 dollars or a prison sentence of up to 20 years for any person who destroys, alters, mutilates or conceals any electronic document in an official investigation. It also specifies minimum retention periods for all accounting records, work papers, communications, file attachments and documents whether transmitted via email, instant messaging or other message modes.
So, first you have to capture all emails, even those that are instantly deleted by the recipient, so just running nightly backups won't cut the mustard. Everything that gets captured has to be archived in a way that lets you prove that the copy hasn't been altered. This generally means writing everything to write-once media, such at DVD-R, or you can generate cryptographic hashes of the messages and write just those and the message headers to write-once media; you'd still need to save the message itself somewhere, but you could use r/w media. Data de-duplication is important, too, so that you don't wind up storing a few hundred copies of this week's hotest Internet meme. "Concealing" also covers not being able to find an email on request, so being able to search everything is important; storing a copy of everything on DVD will be too slow, so you need to use hard drives for this part.
Your auditor and attorneys have to certify that you're compliant, subject to the same penalties, so you need to prove to them that your solution works. This is where networking effects come into play: once your vendor proves to your auditor that their solution works, every other customer of that auditor can use that same package without doing all the legwork. Linus agrees that there are places where unalterable code can be a good thing, and this is one of those places.
John C Dvorak argues that SOX compliance is putting a huge drag on the economy, and I tend to agree, but until the laws are changed, I wouldn't call it FUD.
I play a little guitar. I'm certainly no Hendrix or Santana, but I can play. It didn't take years and years of hard, painful practice either (well, hence why I'm neither Hendrix nor Santana, both of them did actually do just that, besides having exceptional talent, IMO), I just played and, over time, I got better.
Exceptional talent may not be that important. "Many accounts of the development of expertise emphasise that it comes about through long periods of deliberate practice. In many domains of expertise estimates of 10 years experience or 10,000 hours deliberate practice are common. Typically recent research on expertise emphasises the nurture side of the nature versus nurture argument." -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expert
The NYT review of "Outliers" makes good reading on this subject, as well. Not everyone agrees with Malcolm Gladwell's thoughts on the subject, but he argues that talent is the third most important factor in success, behind practice and luck (being in the right place at the right time).
What would be more likely to fly would be a feature complete client to exchange.
That would be Evolution.
Sarbanes-Oxley applies to the USA only. 95% of the world's population don't give a damn about Sarbanes-Oxley.
So, what? 75% of the world's population don't give a damn about email, so 79% of the world's email users do give a damn about Sarbanes-Oxley. (Here's the math: US population = 0.3e9, world population = 6.7e9, world email users = 1.2e9. Thus the US population is 4.5% of the world's, a little less than your estimate, but still pretty close.)
Actually, the 79% is totally bogus, I just divided 75% by 95%. According to http://www.internetworldstats.com/top20.htm, the US has 15% of the world's Internet users. If we assume that everyone using the Internet also uses email and that everyone in the US gives a damn about SOX (since it's a US law, even if it doesn't effect them directly), then you're still too low by a factor of three.
Finally, I haven't seen any figures but I'd assume that most of the entities using Exchange are US businesses. Private individuals are much more likely to be using either webmail or email systems provided by their ISP; I've never heard of either using Exchange as a back end (no, not even Hotmail). And SOX compliance is more than just archiving. You need to be able to produce subsets of your email when requested, etc. Finally, you need to prove to your auditors that you are doing everything in an approved manner.
In conclusion, I'd say that SOX compliance is very important to the majority of those entities that own Exchange.