"Keeping a permanent copy of every bad web site made by every bored teen is not actually useful, any more than keeping every grocery list, or to do list, or every piece of homework you ever did as a child."
I think there have been several "shopping lists" found from ancient cultures such as rome, which can and do shed light on these societies. Even something such as the rosetta stone, may have been deemed worthless at some point in history (and indeed was as they used it for building material). Are you really the one who should be making value judgements about what is considered "bad"? What if beethoven or monet had a geocities page with original works on it, and no one realized their significance till after they were dead. This is the history of the early internet. Everyone who was on the internet in 1997 had a geocities page. It most certainly should be preserved!
Who decides what content is "garbage" anyways?
The point is that 900gb is CHEAP, original information is PRICELESS. So its pretty easy to make a logical unbiased value judgement on this. Keep the data!
I use to think that too, then I had a conversation with HR a few weeks ago, where they stated that they hired 80% of the CSR's last round using twitter links. I was dumbstruck!
Apparently they get less spam and more viable candidates via twitter than any other way.
I am amazed that this actually is tracked by the google van or whatever. It found my old address based on the mac address of my wireless adapter in that particular router. The wan and lan addresses were not found. So it appears that google has a list of many MAC addresses and their locations. Quite scary, and obviously impossible to opt out of.
I really hope some north american government looks into this. What possible non abusive use could this possibly serve? At least the router i am using allows me to change the mac addresses, which is what i am doing now.
"If a company is so restrictive and intrusive that they can't take a couple crazy, sleep-deprived 3 am posts maybe they're not the best place to work?"
Yes but what if everyone does it, or it becomes standard practice, the way some companies do credit checks, or criminal record checks... No more working in corporate america for you!, lest you change your name. Sure who wants to work in corporate america anyway? you can starve for a few months right?
"I just hope who ever uses that type of service is wise enough to not take it too, too seriously."
Picture yourself as an HR person. When you have stopped screaming, think which would look better to your bosses: You taking a chance on dr drinksalot, or rejecting him with evidence, which then makes you look like a) your being super thorough, (basically stalking people in their personal lives) and b) trying extra hard to get the mythical perfect employee for mother company.
You will never get in trouble for not hiring someone based on your "instinct", but you may very well get in trouble for hiring someone who doesnt work out. Which is the safest choice for you to make in that situation?
The solution here has been known since at least 1990, DONT USE YOUR REAL NAME ONLINE! kids today all want to be god damned famous. You reap what you sow childrens!
And then the free version of your game will be released by a "clone" developer who developed it "for fun" and everyone will switch to that. (see hedgewars for an example) At least in the first model you may have made some money. Ruining your app to stop pirates will guarantee that you make NO money!
Personally, i always look for free or open source tools as they are all around less hassle, generally better quality, and i dont have to give people possibly dicey pirated versions off the torrents or whatever.
No one owes you a profit though. Applications made with profit as a focus will always fail in the long run because everyone is so fucking greedy and end users just want a no hassle solution. We live in an age of horrible artificial scarcity, propped up by raping people with advertising and marketing. You want to go down that road, go right ahead buddy. It will leave you burned out, jaded and lobotomized. And in the end, people will still pirate!
trust me, ive been a pirate since bbs times. heck, that was the whole point of bbses! that and naked ladies! (which were also I should point out, pirated...)
If they can degrade non "bribed" sites, they will. I doubt major ISPs are ever heavily saturated, to the point of which if they dont do QOS they would go offline. I have a hard time believing that most ISPs would be so badly managed. Most likely you are paying to have your competitors connection degraded. They might not word it in such a way, but if you read between the lines, that would be the most logical way to do it.
When was the last time your upstream provider ever got saturated? Your connection might, but unless there is some major temporary infrastructure fault (say forcing everyone over a slow link), the ISPS should have more than enough bandwidth. When was the last time you saw a "connection timeout" that wasnt becuase a server was slashdoted or something. Connectivity has been great for the last 10 years.
In short i dont buy your apologizing for the industry in this case. If it was really paying for saturated prioritization, which would be 99% of the time meaningless as links are very rarely saturated, then people wouldn't be so upset about net neutrality. The isps will use it to justify over selling their links and then offer you an "upgrade" to "fix" your favourite sites. Pure bullshit, and thats what they want to do. They want to make the internet like television channels, with paid apps so they can charge for every last connection. They want to charge both the provider and the subscriber.
I only learned this recently, but the reason that gift cards expire from a companies perspective, is that every sold giftcard needs to be carried on their books. Thats why they make them expire, it has to do with accounting practices. I am sure a real accountant could explain better than I, but its something about not carrying the debt for possibly years. The company doesnt know if you lost that giftcard you purchased in 2002 or simply havent used it yet. So it is treated like a cash debt which is still outstanding.
They cant count it as profit until its used - or something. IANAAccountant
I did think it was criminal for gift certificates to expire. I still do, but now I atleast know a legitamte business reason why they do. I am not saying they arent hoping you dont redeem it, just that there is another business case for having them expire.
You would buy ram again from a manufacturer whoes ram flaked out, after less than a year? (im just guessing here but that has been my experience).. OCZ is crap. They make you jump through tonnes of hoops to get warranty support, which you WILL need when their ram fails horribly. Same thing happened to me pretty much, my ram completely failed one day. The problem with OCZ, and it may not be limited to them, but the problem is that their ram is so far out of spec that it is very prone to failure. I think in my case, i was trying to run ram at 1066 and it did run for serveral months like that, but then failed out of the blue. The ram was "rated" by OCZ to run at 1066 but you had to do all kinds of voltage "tweaks" to get the ram to work at that speed. Pure bullshit. If it says 1066 on the box, i damn well expect it to work at 1066 OUT OF THE BOX. Not doing a bunch of voltage tweaks which obviously destabailize the ram causing failures.
So in conclusion, fuck OCZ. I wouldn't buy their ram for my in laws! Corsair has been and still is the ram to buy.
"In short, you haven't been able to prevent people from putting up pictures of you for well over 10 years."
Yes but 10 years ago, people had the common sense and deceny to not post personal information, especially FRIENDS personal information online without their consent! Perhaps you dont remember, but their used to be unwritten rules of the internet such as do not post any personally identifiable information and certainly respect your friends privacy - if you want to remain friends that is.
I think you are arguing that because common courtesy has been lost, we should not still try and remind people that they should be courteous. Sorry I havent personally given up that battle yet. If I overhear or oversee my picture on facebook, i politely explain my views on facebook, privacy and personal control of my image on the internet. I have not had one friend yet who disagreed and opted not to take down the offending picture. There of course may be one or two pictures i missed, but generally when you calmly explain that you do not want to be part of facebook, your friend will honour your request. Also I find it works well to remind people of that when the pictures are initially taken, so it sticks in their head. Like I said, it depends on them being a decent individual though.
With corporate facebook accounts it is the same way. A situation occured recently where someone posted private staff party pictures to the corporate flickr account. I spoke with HR and they agreed that those should not be on the public internet. What happened was that the person who was not technically savvy, did not know that those images would be available to the public at large, and thought that flickr was a part of our intranet (oops). No harm done, and the pictures were deleted.
My point is that it is not futile or even difficult to try and preserve your privacy online. Everyone should strive for it and IMHO, it is extremely dangerous that people do not have that ethic anymore. Children of the 80s -90s, we were ALL raised to not post private info online. I teach my kids that as well.
The lower barrier to entry for posting stuff online is great and what the internet should be. However, people still need to be reminded of common courtesy with regards to the internet as well. Its no different than a public pool, or a shared washroom.
"Progressives have always favored increasing government power, which inherently means reducing individual rights."
Wouldn't that mean that both American political parties are considered progressive then? Probably someone like ralph nader and what you would call extreme left would be the opposite of authoritative centralized control. Or do you consider something like universal health care a progressive ideal? What about police and fire services? What about things such as monopolistic corporations who slowly accumulate and amalgamate control in the hands of the few? Being anti mega corps would be considered un-american by some, but I doubt you can limit your objection to central control to just government. Especially when there are companies that dwarf many governments in their power and reach.
I am actually genuinely curious now, because i have noticed a vein of labeling people progressives and i guess i dont get the terminology in a modern context. Perhaps its something like china with a strong central government, but then the USAs last two presidents have also been very strong on the federal level. What is the alternative in your mind to progressivism in the USA? Libertarianism?
If its libertarianism you are angling for with your anti-progressive talk, well then good luck with that! much like communism, libertarianism seems to only work on very small scales, in very small close knit communities. Sure ideally you can mix in some libertarian ideals into the major american political parties, but trying to apply an 'everyone for themselves attitude' to even the population of a small city would quickly descend into somalia style madness.
Well your lucky then. I upgraded to thunderbird 3 half a year ago and had to downgrade back to thunderbird 2. The reasons were exactly the same as the article, all around poor performance, many crashes and problems. I tried some fixes such as disabling indexing, but they only made it bearable. Thunderbird 2 however is rock solid on my quad core machine.
Do you use both imap and pop? Are you on linux instead of windows? There is probably some way you are using the program that does not reflect the majority. I have heard many reports of people with problems with thunderbird 3 performance. Simply take a look at their forums to get a good sampling.
Old computers generally have smaller power supplies than new ones. I believe the PSU in that machine is 140watts or so. Plus they knew how to design cases back then so its all passively cooled with just one chasis fan for the entire system. Modern dells and HPs do this with ducting as well of course.
Most of the newer SFF pc's all have custom power supplies not atx standard and zero or 1 pci slot, and i need at least 2 (one wireless and one wired to compliment onboard). It works great as a firewall, but i do want to eventually put snort on it which requires more power. It for sure needs an upgrade, but pfsense on a p3 worked great until they went to the newer BSD iirc which has some problem booting that i was never able to solve, trying to deploy 1.2.3.
Well to be fair its an easy mistake to make. I dont have a tv, but i assumed that they had shut off rabbit ear channels as well as the ability to "split" cable between multiple sets with those dollar store splitters that we had when we were kids. I assume that converting everything to digital would have had both of these effects. Now you need a digital cable box to receive the digital signals. Probably you need a different one depending on whether it is over the air or coaxial cable, but i had assumed that the digital requirement by the US government and these corporations would make all signals digital now ( as in bye bye analog everything). I thought thats why people were complaining so much, because everyone and their grandmother splits their cable to multiple tvs. I thought that was the whole reason that the us govt decided to buy everyone cable boxes at 70$ per unit or somesuch. I find it hard to believe that a 70$ box is little more than an antenna to receive OTA signals, but i guess i was wrong.
In both cases you need to buy a new box, per tv, so really it is easy to get confused, especially if you are not a tv user for the last 10 years and missed out on the whole digital cable box idea.
The guy was slightly snarky but this is ask slashdot we are talking about. I was under the impression that the whole point of ask slashdot was to make fun of the person asking the question!
"Just by Googling the Handle some people use, you can start to gather pieces of personal information, email, phone numbers, real names, places, jobs, etc can be found in a matter of minutes, one piece of information leading to another, which leads to another"
Unless you have gone to great lengths to conceal your online identity by never reusing the same pseudonyms, not posting your email, real name or number, etc. What can be found within a matter of minutes for some, might be impossible without ip address logs for others. Sure, you are only one compromised system away from having one psuedonym identified, but if you do a good job, you shouldn't be that affected. Of course a concerted effort involving law enforcement, subpoenas and ISP level logs will probbaly make short work of any anonymity, but these options are not available to most people looking to get even with someone on the internet (or whatever).
Saying that all privacy on the internet is pointless because some people cover their tracks badly is a pretty stupid argument to make. On the other hand, would i even bother posting this if it was tied to my real name? Im sure my employer wouldn't want me wasting company time making this comment, thats for sure. Some people like being anonymous, or at least pseudo anonymous on the internets.
"I've heard from some DD-WRT-using friends bragging about how they cranked up the radio power on their router"
Careful doing that though. I killed the wireless radio on my linksys bumping up the power. It worked for a few minutes and then died and never came back.
"All of us agree that there needs to be a way to keep others from profiting from our work"
For how long, perpetuity? You say that your father invented rock-a-billy. Wikipedia claims that this style of music was invented in the 50s. So we are looking now at 60 years ago. So something your father created and released 60 years ago should still be generating revenue for you and your family? What about when it gets to 100 years, 200? When does it get to become part of our shared cultural heritage, that anyone should be able to enjoy? Never? When you made "enough" money from it?
I get that you want to make money for work your father did 50 or 60 years ago, but if i build a computer or a house or a deck for someone, i don't then get collect royalties and expect them to support me 60 years later. Or in your example, ask permission to have a dinner party on the deck. You are basically denying people access to a part of the culture, because you want to make more money. I get it, and honestly, if i was in the same position Im not saying I wouldn't do the exact same thing. It does also complicate things that they are charging money for it. Ideally, no one should have to pay for any music. Sometimes for rare things that are simply not available anywhere, you end up paying someone who has access to the content. What I would do if I were you, is release the content in question on your own website as a digital download for a small fee to cover hosting and bandwidth (perhaps 5$ an album). You could very easily destroy any profit that this sweedish company is making overnight.
Thats a creative solution to your problem, which allows you to make some money and also allows people access to perhaps hard to find recordings. Music is about telling a story. No one has a right to determine who can and cannot listen to stories. The whole of humanities oral traditions are at stake with the locking up and denying of access to culture.
If the environment gets ruined because American law says that they don't have to drill relief wells (unlike many other countries), who the fuck cares about jobs? Sure we cant go to the beach on the weekend, can't eat fish, and tourism is completely in the shitter, but at least gas only costs 1$ a litre! I can just drive somewhere thats not polluted, right?
Sorry to get in the way of your stupid american partisan politics, but honestly, in reality - its not hard to do the math. Simply weigh on one side, a priceless environment ruined by a disaster which may now be world wide , and on the other side some US energy sector jobs. Sure it sucks for the 80k people (your figure) that are impacted by this, but i tend to think that the gulf coast environment, and perhaps the entire atlantic ocean, is a wee bit more important. I would think that this would be obvious to anyone who didn't have some other political agenda to push here.
Smart people can ALWAYS find other lines of work. What happened to them pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps? Or does that talking point only apply to a different political debate. I get that it may seem like an over-reaction, but clearly your american government has severely UNDER reacted for the last 30 years, in regards to regulating oil drilling. Id prefer they make up for that now, rather than continuing on the course that has directly led to this "meltdown". We shouldn't need a meltdown to enforce regulation on dangerous industries, but in america it seems to be how they like to do things. Ass backwards.
"While for me Chatroulette was nothing more than a one-time novelty and an interesting experiment by Ben Folds"
Well I don't know who "ben folds" is, but chatroulette was started by a russian teen programmer named Andrey Ternovskiy, who had positive experiences meeting people of other cultures in his uncles(?) Moscow based tourist shop. He tried to recreate this on the web. His vision was random people in the world having video chats to each other, to share knowledge and experience.
There was a whole newyorker article on chatroulette. I am not surprised that he is trying to monetize it, as he is young and had alot of interest stateside (as to be expected with any viral hit web 2.0 application).
Just because it was a novelty *For You*, does not mean that you get to attribute your, shall we say "wild guesses" to the motivations and ideals behind the site. They discuss cocks and stuff in the new yorker article and it seemed to me that he was planning some sort of filtering to make it more usable. You are always going to get trolls if you have a purely anonymous fourm. Fighting trolls on the internet is a skill one has to acquire and adapt. This is what he seems to be doing, in a slightly comedic but genuinely interesting way. He seems like a bright kid, so i wouldnt write him off as a one hit wonder yet.
"Let it continue on in the way it has or let it die. Let's stop bastardizing stuff because a bunch of investors don't like others seeing the raging members"
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that chatroulette was designed to display cocks. Raging members might be what your biases have led you to focus on, but it was never "the way" of the site, any more than slashdots way is penis birds or gnaa trolls. Perhaps if you actually read a bit more about the topic before commenting, you wouldn't be so mistaken in your key assumptions. (you must be old here, mr 4 digit userid!)
Slashdot Mirror
I think there have been several "shopping lists" found from ancient cultures such as rome, which can and do shed light on these societies. Even something such as the rosetta stone, may have been deemed worthless at some point in history (and indeed was as they used it for building material). Are you really the one who should be making value judgements about what is considered "bad"? What if beethoven or monet had a geocities page with original works on it, and no one realized their significance till after they were dead. This is the history of the early internet. Everyone who was on the internet in 1997 had a geocities page. It most certainly should be preserved!
Who decides what content is "garbage" anyways?
The point is that 900gb is CHEAP, original information is PRICELESS. So its pretty easy to make a logical unbiased value judgement on this. Keep the data!
You might as well say, "Anytime ANYONE is in control there is a censorship issue".
Come on editors, i know you desperately want to talk about american politics, but isn't that what the poll to the right is for?
Who needs a big stupid flamewar? No one but Ralph Nader leans LEFT in the usa ANYWAYS!
Sounds like something someone with some sort of brain damage would say! I wonder how it was caused...
I use to think that too, then I had a conversation with HR a few weeks ago, where they stated that they hired 80% of the CSR's last round using twitter links. I was dumbstruck!
Apparently they get less spam and more viable candidates via twitter than any other way.
Except transit buses generally now all have cameras in them and your transit pass may or may not contain personally identifiable info on it.
I am amazed that this actually is tracked by the google van or whatever. It found my old address based on the mac address of my wireless adapter in that particular router. The wan and lan addresses were not found. So it appears that google has a list of many MAC addresses and their locations. Quite scary, and obviously impossible to opt out of.
I really hope some north american government looks into this. What possible non abusive use could this possibly serve? At least the router i am using allows me to change the mac addresses, which is what i am doing now.
Yes but what if everyone does it, or it becomes standard practice, the way some companies do credit checks, or criminal record checks... No more working in corporate america for you!, lest you change your name. Sure who wants to work in corporate america anyway? you can starve for a few months right?
Picture yourself as an HR person. When you have stopped screaming, think which would look better to your bosses: You taking a chance on dr drinksalot, or rejecting him with evidence, which then makes you look like a) your being super thorough, (basically stalking people in their personal lives) and b) trying extra hard to get the mythical perfect employee for mother company.
You will never get in trouble for not hiring someone based on your "instinct", but you may very well get in trouble for hiring someone who doesnt work out. Which is the safest choice for you to make in that situation?
The solution here has been known since at least 1990, DONT USE YOUR REAL NAME ONLINE!
kids today all want to be god damned famous. You reap what you sow childrens!
And then the free version of your game will be released by a "clone" developer who developed it "for fun" and everyone will switch to that. (see hedgewars for an example)
At least in the first model you may have made some money. Ruining your app to stop pirates will guarantee that you make NO money!
Personally, i always look for free or open source tools as they are all around less hassle, generally better quality, and i dont have to give people possibly dicey pirated versions off the torrents or whatever.
No one owes you a profit though. Applications made with profit as a focus will always fail in the long run because everyone is so fucking greedy and end users just want a no hassle solution. We live in an age of horrible artificial scarcity, propped up by raping people with advertising and marketing.
You want to go down that road, go right ahead buddy. It will leave you burned out, jaded and lobotomized. And in the end, people will still pirate!
trust me, ive been a pirate since bbs times. heck, that was the whole point of bbses!
that and naked ladies!
(which were also I should point out, pirated...)
If they can degrade non "bribed" sites, they will. I doubt major ISPs are ever heavily saturated, to the point of which if they dont do QOS they would go offline. I have a hard time believing that most ISPs would be so badly managed. Most likely you are paying to have your competitors connection degraded. They might not word it in such a way, but if you read between the lines, that would be the most logical way to do it.
When was the last time your upstream provider ever got saturated? Your connection might, but unless there is some major temporary infrastructure fault (say forcing everyone over a slow link), the ISPS should have more than enough bandwidth. When was the last time you saw a "connection timeout" that wasnt becuase a server was slashdoted or something. Connectivity has been great for the last 10 years.
In short i dont buy your apologizing for the industry in this case. If it was really paying for saturated prioritization, which would be 99% of the time meaningless as links are very rarely saturated, then people wouldn't be so upset about net neutrality. The isps will use it to justify over selling their links and then offer you an "upgrade" to "fix" your favourite sites. Pure bullshit, and thats what they want to do. They want to make the internet like television channels, with paid apps so they can charge for every last connection. They want to charge both the provider and the subscriber.
I only learned this recently, but the reason that gift cards expire from a companies perspective, is that every sold giftcard needs to be carried on their books. Thats why they make them expire, it has to do with accounting practices. I am sure a real accountant could explain better than I, but its something about not carrying the debt for possibly years. The company doesnt know if you lost that giftcard you purchased in 2002 or simply havent used it yet. So it is treated like a cash debt which is still outstanding.
They cant count it as profit until its used - or something. IANAAccountant
I did think it was criminal for gift certificates to expire. I still do, but now I atleast know a legitamte business reason why they do. I am not saying they arent hoping you dont redeem it, just that there is another business case for having them expire.
Indeed! from reddit:
PR Newswire is NOT Reuters!
You would buy ram again from a manufacturer whoes ram flaked out, after less than a year? (im just guessing here but that has been my experience).. OCZ is crap. They make you jump through tonnes of hoops to get warranty support, which you WILL need when their ram fails horribly. Same thing happened to me pretty much, my ram completely failed one day. The problem with OCZ, and it may not be limited to them, but the problem is that their ram is so far out of spec that it is very prone to failure. I think in my case, i was trying to run ram at 1066 and it did run for serveral months like that, but then failed out of the blue. The ram was "rated" by OCZ to run at 1066 but you had to do all kinds of voltage "tweaks" to get the ram to work at that speed. Pure bullshit. If it says 1066 on the box, i damn well expect it to work at 1066 OUT OF THE BOX. Not doing a bunch of voltage tweaks which obviously destabailize the ram causing failures.
So in conclusion, fuck OCZ. I wouldn't buy their ram for my in laws! Corsair has been and still is the ram to buy.
Yes but 10 years ago, people had the common sense and deceny to not post personal information, especially FRIENDS personal information online without their consent!
Perhaps you dont remember, but their used to be unwritten rules of the internet such as do not post any personally identifiable information and certainly respect your friends privacy - if you want to remain friends that is.
I think you are arguing that because common courtesy has been lost, we should not still try and remind people that they should be courteous. Sorry I havent personally given up that battle yet.
If I overhear or oversee my picture on facebook, i politely explain my views on facebook, privacy and personal control of my image on the internet. I have not had one friend yet who disagreed and opted not to take down the offending picture. There of course may be one or two pictures i missed, but generally when you calmly explain that you do not want to be part of facebook, your friend will honour your request. Also I find it works well to remind people of that when the pictures are initially taken, so it sticks in their head. Like I said, it depends on them being a decent individual though.
With corporate facebook accounts it is the same way. A situation occured recently where someone posted private staff party pictures to the corporate flickr account. I spoke with HR and they agreed that those should not be on the public internet. What happened was that the person who was not technically savvy, did not know that those images would be available to the public at large, and thought that flickr was a part of our intranet (oops). No harm done, and the pictures were deleted.
My point is that it is not futile or even difficult to try and preserve your privacy online. Everyone should strive for it and IMHO, it is extremely dangerous that people do not have that ethic anymore. Children of the 80s -90s, we were ALL raised to not post private info online. I teach my kids that as well.
The lower barrier to entry for posting stuff online is great and what the internet should be. However, people still need to be reminded of common courtesy with regards to the internet as well. Its no different than a public pool, or a shared washroom.
Wouldn't that mean that both American political parties are considered progressive then? Probably someone like ralph nader and what you would call extreme left would be the opposite of authoritative centralized control. Or do you consider something like universal health care a progressive ideal? What about police and fire services? What about things such as monopolistic corporations who slowly accumulate and amalgamate control in the hands of the few? Being anti mega corps would be considered un-american by some, but I doubt you can limit your objection to central control to just government. Especially when there are companies that dwarf many governments in their power and reach.
I am actually genuinely curious now, because i have noticed a vein of labeling people progressives and i guess i dont get the terminology in a modern context. Perhaps its something like china with a strong central government, but then the USAs last two presidents have also been very strong on the federal level. What is the alternative in your mind to progressivism in the USA? Libertarianism?
If its libertarianism you are angling for with your anti-progressive talk, well then good luck with that! much like communism, libertarianism seems to only work on very small scales, in very small close knit communities. Sure ideally you can mix in some libertarian ideals into the major american political parties, but trying to apply an 'everyone for themselves attitude' to even the population of a small city would quickly descend into somalia style madness.
Well your lucky then. I upgraded to thunderbird 3 half a year ago and had to downgrade back to thunderbird 2. The reasons were exactly the same as the article, all around poor performance, many crashes and problems. I tried some fixes such as disabling indexing, but they only made it bearable. Thunderbird 2 however is rock solid on my quad core machine.
Do you use both imap and pop? Are you on linux instead of windows? There is probably some way you are using the program that does not reflect the majority. I have heard many reports of people with problems with thunderbird 3 performance. Simply take a look at their forums to get a good sampling.
Old computers generally have smaller power supplies than new ones. I believe the PSU in that machine is 140watts or so.
Plus they knew how to design cases back then so its all passively cooled with just one chasis fan for the entire system. Modern dells and HPs do this with ducting as well of course.
Most of the newer SFF pc's all have custom power supplies not atx standard and zero or 1 pci slot, and i need at least 2 (one wireless and one wired to compliment onboard). It works great as a firewall, but i do want to eventually put snort on it which requires more power. It for sure needs an upgrade, but pfsense on a p3 worked great until they went to the newer BSD iirc which has some problem booting that i was never able to solve, trying to deploy 1.2.3.
yay open source! I was shocked to see pfsense on that list in the first place!
now if only the newer builds after 1.2 booted on my p3 450 :( i could possibly upgrade.
Well to be fair its an easy mistake to make. I dont have a tv, but i assumed that they had shut off rabbit ear channels as well as the ability to "split" cable between multiple sets with those dollar store splitters that we had when we were kids. I assume that converting everything to digital would have had both of these effects. Now you need a digital cable box to receive the digital signals. Probably you need a different one depending on whether it is over the air or coaxial cable, but i had assumed that the digital requirement by the US government and these corporations would make all signals digital now ( as in bye bye analog everything). I thought thats why people were complaining so much, because everyone and their grandmother splits their cable to multiple tvs. I thought that was the whole reason that the us govt decided to buy everyone cable boxes at 70$ per unit or somesuch. I find it hard to believe that a 70$ box is little more than an antenna to receive OTA signals, but i guess i was wrong.
In both cases you need to buy a new box, per tv, so really it is easy to get confused, especially if you are not a tv user for the last 10 years and missed out on the whole digital cable box idea.
The guy was slightly snarky but this is ask slashdot we are talking about. I was under the impression that the whole point of ask slashdot was to make fun of the person asking the question!
Unless you have gone to great lengths to conceal your online identity by never reusing the same pseudonyms, not posting your email, real name or number, etc. What can be found within a matter of minutes for some, might be impossible without ip address logs for others. Sure, you are only one compromised system away from having one psuedonym identified, but if you do a good job, you shouldn't be that affected. Of course a concerted effort involving law enforcement, subpoenas and ISP level logs will probbaly make short work of any anonymity, but these options are not available to most people looking to get even with someone on the internet (or whatever).
Saying that all privacy on the internet is pointless because some people cover their tracks badly is a pretty stupid argument to make. On the other hand, would i even bother posting this if it was tied to my real name? Im sure my employer wouldn't want me wasting company time making this comment, thats for sure. Some people like being anonymous, or at least pseudo anonymous on the internets.
Careful doing that though. I killed the wireless radio on my linksys bumping up the power. It worked for a few minutes and then died and never came back.
For how long, perpetuity? You say that your father invented rock-a-billy. Wikipedia claims that this style of music was invented in the 50s. So we are looking now at 60 years ago. So something your father created and released 60 years ago should still be generating revenue for you and your family? What about when it gets to 100 years, 200? When does it get to become part of our shared cultural heritage, that anyone should be able to enjoy? Never? When you made "enough" money from it?
I get that you want to make money for work your father did 50 or 60 years ago, but if i build a computer or a house or a deck for someone, i don't then get collect royalties and expect them to support me 60 years later. Or in your example, ask permission to have a dinner party on the deck. You are basically denying people access to a part of the culture, because you want to make more money. I get it, and honestly, if i was in the same position Im not saying I wouldn't do the exact same thing. It does also complicate things that they are charging money for it. Ideally, no one should have to pay for any music. Sometimes for rare things that are simply not available anywhere, you end up paying someone who has access to the content. What I would do if I were you, is release the content in question on your own website as a digital download for a small fee to cover hosting and bandwidth (perhaps 5$ an album). You could very easily destroy any profit that this sweedish company is making overnight.
Thats a creative solution to your problem, which allows you to make some money and also allows people access to perhaps hard to find recordings. Music is about telling a story. No one has a right to determine who can and cannot listen to stories. The whole of humanities oral traditions are at stake with the locking up and denying of access to culture.
If the environment gets ruined because American law says that they don't have to drill relief wells (unlike many other countries), who the fuck cares about jobs? Sure we cant go to the beach on the weekend, can't eat fish, and tourism is completely in the shitter, but at least gas only costs 1$ a litre! I can just drive somewhere thats not polluted, right?
Sorry to get in the way of your stupid american partisan politics, but honestly, in reality - its not hard to do the math. Simply weigh on one side, a priceless environment ruined by a disaster which may now be world wide , and on the other side some US energy sector jobs. Sure it sucks for the 80k people (your figure) that are impacted by this, but i tend to think that the gulf coast environment, and perhaps the entire atlantic ocean, is a wee bit more important. I would think that this would be obvious to anyone who didn't have some other political agenda to push here.
Smart people can ALWAYS find other lines of work. What happened to them pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps? Or does that talking point only apply to a different political debate. I get that it may seem like an over-reaction, but clearly your american government has severely UNDER reacted for the last 30 years, in regards to regulating oil drilling. Id prefer they make up for that now, rather than continuing on the course that has directly led to this "meltdown".
We shouldn't need a meltdown to enforce regulation on dangerous industries, but in america it seems to be how they like to do things.
Ass backwards.
Why bother following any laws anymore? So many unjust laws on the books it almost undermines the validity of any sane laws that are left.
Well I don't know who "ben folds" is, but chatroulette was started by a russian teen programmer named Andrey Ternovskiy, who had positive experiences meeting people of other cultures in his uncles(?) Moscow based tourist shop. He tried to recreate this on the web. His vision was random people in the world having video chats to each other, to share knowledge and experience.
There was a whole newyorker article on chatroulette. I am not surprised that he is trying to monetize it, as he is young and had alot of interest stateside (as to be expected with any viral hit web 2.0 application).
Just because it was a novelty *For You*, does not mean that you get to attribute your, shall we say "wild guesses" to the motivations and ideals behind the site. They discuss cocks and stuff in the new yorker article and it seemed to me that he was planning some sort of filtering to make it more usable. You are always going to get trolls if you have a purely anonymous fourm. Fighting trolls on the internet is a skill one has to acquire and adapt. This is what he seems to be doing, in a slightly comedic but genuinely interesting way. He seems like a bright kid, so i wouldnt write him off as a one hit wonder yet.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that chatroulette was designed to display cocks. Raging members might be what your biases have led you to focus on, but it was never "the way" of the site, any more than slashdots way is penis birds or gnaa trolls. Perhaps if you actually read a bit more about the topic before commenting, you wouldn't be so mistaken in your key assumptions. (you must be old here, mr 4 digit userid!)