When I worked for a satellite TV provider that I will not name. I had to call several customers to confirm appointments, and make arrangements to resolve conflicts. When I would encounter PM it would add at least 2 minutes to what is often a 1 minute call.
So, somehow it makes sense to inconvienence everyone who calls you, just so you can avoid a few telemarketing calls.
When I was exclusively a Mac OS user, there was Compact Pro,.cpt which was sensitive to the resource forks and I used to use MacZip on occation as well. I never had a problem with my resource forks getting boogered up.
When I ran my MacOS based (Hermes II) BBS, there was a utility (I believe Chris Owen wrote it) to convert.sit archives to.cpt archives because they tended to be a few k smaller, at least back when most BBS downloads were in the 1MB size range.
or a scary flashback to how early 'subscription-only' fire departments worked?
I live in Pennsylvania, in the suburbs of Pittsburgh. All of the suburban fire departments are volunteer.
I don't know if this is just a local urban legend, but when I was in 6th grade our teacher (who lived in the same suburb as I did at the time) told us a story that supposedly happened in the 60's or 70's about a stingy rich person who refused to donate EVERY TIME the local volunteer fire department was looking for money and when her house caught on fire they came to her block and sprayed water on her next door neighbor's houses to make sure that the fire didn't spread, but they all refused to risk their lives for a person who didn't donate to their cause.
How many of us here on slashdot are going to get tricked in this manner? For those of us on Mac or *n*x systems the difference is obvious.
The first time I saw one of those pop-ups was right after I upgraded my Mac to Mac OS 8.6, I remember thinking 'Did Apple really go this far to try to woo Windows users?' when I first saw it. I closed the window and moved on. And when I was using my PC I saw the exact same message and realized what was going on.
Yes, you too can be part of the twenty-first century "I'M SO STUPID I DESERVE MONEY" movement.
Not 21st century at all. Remember when that woman won a multi-million dollar lawsuit against McDonalds because she spilled hot coffee on herself?!?!?!?! That happened in the 20th.
Granted the verdict was reversed on appeal, but the point is that she won the original case.
The US military may change the specs on the ammo, but the cartridge is still 5.56mm Nato. The outside dimensions of the round are still the same. They can use a longer bullet, but the extra length is inside of the cartridge case. The same ammo can be chambered and fired from any 5.56mm Nato or.223 Rem rifle.
IIRC, the light 5.56mm slug is unstable, and tumbles when it hits an object. It spins in the body like a circular saw.
Not exactly. Because of the light weight, there is less inertia that can cause the bullet to glance off of bone. When that happens, quite often the bullet tumbles. The 5.56mm round is also easily influenced by wind.
The new, heavier round used with the M16A2 is more stable, hits and penetrates better, but is less lethal.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that that you are simply misinformed. The M16/A1/A2/AR-15/Et Al fire the exact same ammunition 5.56mm Nato also known as.223 Remington. The A1 and A2 are more reliable than the original M16. Ask any vietnam vet who was there in the late 60's the original M16 didn't do well in the adverse conditions that tends to find anywhere off of a firing range.
Canadian or European what? I presume you aren't talking about me because you should already know where I'm from, just from my e-mail address.
I have a pitt.edu email address, but I have never attended nor worked for the University of Pittsburgh. You having a European email address is not positive proof of your origin.
On the other hand, if the river had its source and estuary in Pennsylvania {Penn. may be landlocked. Don't flame me for this. Can you name the landlocked counties in this country?}
My knowledge of European geography is sufficiently poor that I wouldn't berate you for not knowing all of the tributaries of our Mississippi river.
But I don't think that this example applies either, because once that river empties into the Ocean, that hypothetical arsenic would become the concern of every other state (hell even the concern of other countries).
The point that I'm making is that not only does the conditions within one entity have an impact on those that border and contain it, but our system of government allows the Federal government authority to control many, MANY activities. When our country was founded, there was a great debate between federalists and anti-federalists, for the most part the federalists won.
Do you mean to say that US Federal laws outweigh individual state laws?
Ah, Canadian or European?
That is so arse-backwards. Surely local laws should prevail locally, then state, then federal laws. {If what happens in an Enclosed Space will have no influence outside that Enclosed Space, then no-one outside of that space has the right to object to what happens therein}.
If my state (Pennsylvania) has no restrictions on the amount of arsenic that an industrial plant can release into a river, but when that river gets to Ohio, those people have no recourse if there is no Federal standard.
Otherwise you haven't got a federal system at all, you've got a feudal system.
Law is words on paper, and people's willingness to act by those words. It goes no further. If Californians don't want to follow the law, they won't, and no amount of the feds crying "follow our laws or we'll make new ones!" will help.
But someone losing a civil judgement and having to pay Lexmark $150,000 WILL make a difference.
Since medical pot users are only supposed to consume small quantities, this doesn't happen unless a prosecutor is trying to make an example of someone, otherwise it's too expensive.
Do you have a TV? Do you watch it? Don't you remember Ashcroft sending the DEA and FBI to take people to jail for dispensing medical MJ?
This is insightful? It shows ignorance of basic Constitutional issues, such as the 10th Amendment. The Constitution delegates states' power to the Central Gov't. If it ain't delegated explicitly, the power stays with the States. Copyright and patent _were_ delegated. Medicine certainly wasn't.
Your response shows an ignorance of case law and the preeminent judicial interpretation of the constitution. Congress is given the authority to regulate "interstate commerce", printers and ink are shipped and sold between states.
I'll quote the constitution for the benefit of the uninformed
Congress shall have the power...
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states and with the Indian Tribes
Californian state officials generally don't enforce the federal marijuana laws. They don't have to. That's why you get federal officers doing most of the drug-busting in California, which costs the federal government a load of cash and time.
True enough, but in this day and age of "homeland security" the feds have pretty deep pockets. I'm sure we've all seen the TV commercials about how buying a sack of weed will finance worldwide terrorism.
And what happens to people in California, when they're found guilty of growing or posessing medical marijuana? They get just one day in jail.
Until one of two things happen. When the feds need a new whipping boy, medical MJ is an easy target. Or, when the feds tie federal highway money to a state's laws on MJ, a state like CA that is already billions of dollars in debt will have no choice but to comply.
Now, apply this to ink. Granted, it's a lot different that marijuana laws - but, the state will wind up doing nothing to help the federal government in this matter, which is a big win. And it'll turn a blind-eye to anyone who wants to keep producing 3rd-party ink. Another win.
The carrot of federal dollars has a LOT to do with a state's laws. Have you ever wondered why every state in the union has a minimum drinking age of 21? Or why most states has a maximum speed limit of 55 (until about a decade ago)?
As a matter of principle you have to attack federal idiocy at the federal level.
The idea of nullification now'a'days is just to be such a pain in the ass that the federal government has to eventually rethink their position. Hell, look at all the anti-patriot act bills floating around.
If only more of my countrymen would learn about their right to jury nullification, we'd see fewer stupid laws on the books.
However, if you truly believe in the right to free speech, you must be willing to take the good with the bad. Anyone who suggests anything else doesn't truly believe in free speech.
I don't see it that way. That is not the issue for many of us.
I believe that you have the right to be a holocaust revisionist, but I will not repeat, or relay your opinions on the matter.
I support your right to be a racist. I will not repeat or relay your opinions on the matter.
I support your right to be "pro-choice". I will not repeat or relay your opinions on the matter.
I believe in your right to access images on the internet. I will not be a party to your search for child pornography.
There is a difference between supporting the ideal of free speech and in being an active participant in someone else's speech.
Argue all you want, but when it looks human and acts human, you're not going to think about whether or not you should thank him, especially when it clearly shows independent thought.
Argue all you want, the TX was mere inches away. It was stupid and annoying for him to stop. Yell a thank you back at the T800 when you've made it to safety.
Even on unmetered bandwidth, due you think that the ISP will soak up additional costs by cutting their salaries/profits? Chances are they will pass the increased costs onto the customer. And certainly, it won't be the spammer who pays.
How much spam do you get? In a month, I use less bandwitdh getting and disposing of spam than I use in two hours of web surfing. Hardly enough to cause my ISP to incur additional overhead.
AOL Journals (named as such, since a survey showed the average user found the word 'blog' to be confusing)
Other users (like me) find the word 'blog' to be stupid. It sounds like a level one reaches in the Boy Scouts 'Webloes', 'Weblefs' and 'Weblogs'
LK
Re:I have said it before and I will say it again..
on
In Pursuit Of A Spammer
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
Spam costs me money.
Are you using metered bandwidth? How much per kilobyte do you pay?
Every time I open an email I don't want, every time I have to update my anti-spam software (well, that's free but that's besides the point) it costs me time and money and I object.
Every time a neophyte friend or relative forwards a virus warning hoax to you, it costs you time and money, should that be illegal too?
I didn't. I have visited military bases. For non sensitive areas there is more security than there obviously was in this case.
So he's not going to be human anyway? Anybody would have done that. Besides, Arnie did something rather selfless.
As much as I love it a good song comes on the radio as I'm driving to work, I never thank my SUV or the stereo system in it. The terminator was a machine, doing what it was designed, built and programmed to do.
Skynet was born within the complex. It had the resources it needed there, and the other T-1s were protecting it. Nobody outside of the facility even knew what was going on.
No plot hole here, move along.
Huge gaping plothole here. When John tells Kate's father that he wants to stop Skynet, he would have instructed him to destroy the facility that they were in, if that was where Skynet resided. The T1s were not protecting anything in that building, they were killing as many people with knowledge about Skynet as possible. People who might survive the nuclear war and assist the human resistance years later.
Who say's its not a central machine 30 years from now?
Valid point. I did not think of that. Perhaps, when the humans win, it's Skynet XP or something that they are fighting.
1.) She liked him already. 2.) Who said anybody fell for anybody? The best you got was a handhold while John was stepping into the role he didn't want to be in.
She liked him 10 years before, and that handhold proves my point that she "started" to fall for John. I didn't assume that they started making babies that night.
1.) He was drinking to get over the trauma he suffered. That hardly makes him a boozer.
That is exactly what makes a boozer.
Even if it did, it's tough to imagine booze was widely available during the war.
Booze was available 5 thousand years ago, if they have energy weapons, making some wine is not going to be beyond their technology.
2.) He was pill popping because he injured his leg. 3.) What's one got to do with the other?
A whole bottle of pills, in one session? And they hinted that it wasn't the first time.
He had more knowledge about what was to happen than anybody else did. In a sense, the Terminators created John Connor.
Another valid point.
I know it's way too late to expect you to see this, but I caught your post after spotting the topic during metamod. I think you're overanalyzing the movie looking for faults in it, thus removing the fun for yourself.
I always check back for responses. I did enjoy the movie, but it could have been much better.
Slashdot Mirror
Privacy Manager
Annoying as hell, for legitimate business calls.
When I worked for a satellite TV provider that I will not name. I had to call several customers to confirm appointments, and make arrangements to resolve conflicts. When I would encounter PM it would add at least 2 minutes to what is often a 1 minute call.
So, somehow it makes sense to inconvienence everyone who calls you, just so you can avoid a few telemarketing calls.
LK
The question then becomes *why* we should have to pay a service fee and do manual filtering to avoid being harassed in our own homes.
Come on now, aren't you blowing this a little out of proportion? If someone that you don't want to talk to calls you, hang up the telephone.
What's next "do not knock" lists for Jehova witnesses and Girl Scouts.
LK
Imagine world where no one upgrades their old 486 just becouse it is impossible to buy 30-pin SIMMs,
Goodwill computer store, you can get 30 pin simms for $1.00 each.
LK
When I was exclusively a Mac OS user, there was Compact Pro, .cpt which was sensitive to the resource forks and I used to use MacZip on occation as well. I never had a problem with my resource forks getting boogered up.
.sit archives to .cpt archives because they tended to be a few k smaller, at least back when most BBS downloads were in the 1MB size range.
When I ran my MacOS based (Hermes II) BBS, there was a utility (I believe Chris Owen wrote it) to convert
LK
or a scary flashback to how early 'subscription-only' fire departments worked?
I live in Pennsylvania, in the suburbs of Pittsburgh. All of the suburban fire departments are volunteer.
I don't know if this is just a local urban legend, but when I was in 6th grade our teacher (who lived in the same suburb as I did at the time) told us a story that supposedly happened in the 60's or 70's about a stingy rich person who refused to donate EVERY TIME the local volunteer fire department was looking for money and when her house caught on fire they came to her block and sprayed water on her next door neighbor's houses to make sure that the fire didn't spread, but they all refused to risk their lives for a person who didn't donate to their cause.
LK
So you could be tried for purjury too?
Not at all. When they ask me "Are you known to the Kazaa community as 'The Greatest Lover In The World'?".
I can answer "Well counselor, you and Ms. Rosen are certainly entitled to your own opinions, but I'm a bit more modest than that."
LK
I've been thinking that it would be great to be known as "The_Greatest_Lover_In_The_World" on Kazaa for that very reason.
LK
How many of us here on slashdot are going to get tricked in this manner? For those of us on Mac or *n*x systems the difference is obvious.
The first time I saw one of those pop-ups was right after I upgraded my Mac to Mac OS 8.6, I remember thinking 'Did Apple really go this far to try to woo Windows users?' when I first saw it. I closed the window and moved on. And when I was using my PC I saw the exact same message and realized what was going on.
LK
Yes, you too can be part of the twenty-first century "I'M SO STUPID I DESERVE MONEY" movement.
Not 21st century at all. Remember when that woman won a multi-million dollar lawsuit against McDonalds because she spilled hot coffee on herself?!?!?!?! That happened in the 20th.
Granted the verdict was reversed on appeal, but the point is that she won the original case.
LK
The US military may change the specs on the ammo, but the cartridge is still 5.56mm Nato. The outside dimensions of the round are still the same. They can use a longer bullet, but the extra length is inside of the cartridge case. The same ammo can be chambered and fired from any 5.56mm Nato or .223 Rem rifle.
LK
IIRC, the light 5.56mm slug is unstable, and tumbles when it hits an object. It spins in the body like a circular saw.
.223 Remington. The A1 and A2 are more reliable than the original M16. Ask any vietnam vet who was there in the late 60's the original M16 didn't do well in the adverse conditions that tends to find anywhere off of a firing range.
Not exactly. Because of the light weight, there is less inertia that can cause the bullet to glance off of bone. When that happens, quite often the bullet tumbles. The 5.56mm round is also easily influenced by wind.
The new, heavier round used with the M16A2 is more stable, hits and penetrates better, but is less lethal.
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that that you are simply misinformed. The M16/A1/A2/AR-15/Et Al fire the exact same ammunition 5.56mm Nato also known as
LK
Compare to a 7.62mm round, which is traveling slower, heavier than a 5.56, but it does LOTs more damage
7.62mm WHAT? &.62x30mm like an AK-47 or an SKS or 7.62mm Nato(.308) like the AR-10 or 7.62x54mm or 30-06 with is 7.62mm as well?
Each of those calibers have different powder capacities and as a result different weight bullets are used, meaning different muzzle velocities.
LK
Canadian or European what? I presume you aren't talking about me because you should already know where I'm from, just from my e-mail address.
I have a pitt.edu email address, but I have never attended nor worked for the University of Pittsburgh. You having a European email address is not positive proof of your origin.
On the other hand, if the river had its source and estuary in Pennsylvania {Penn. may be landlocked. Don't flame me for this. Can you name the landlocked counties in this country?}
My knowledge of European geography is sufficiently poor that I wouldn't berate you for not knowing all of the tributaries of our Mississippi river.
But I don't think that this example applies either, because once that river empties into the Ocean, that hypothetical arsenic would become the concern of every other state (hell even the concern of other countries).
The point that I'm making is that not only does the conditions within one entity have an impact on those that border and contain it, but our system of government allows the Federal government authority to control many, MANY activities. When our country was founded, there was a great debate between federalists and anti-federalists, for the most part the federalists won.
LK
Do you mean to say that US Federal laws outweigh individual state laws?
Ah, Canadian or European?
That is so arse-backwards. Surely local laws should prevail locally, then state, then federal laws. {If what happens in an Enclosed Space will have no influence outside that Enclosed Space, then no-one outside of that space has the right to object to what happens therein}.
If my state (Pennsylvania) has no restrictions on the amount of arsenic that an industrial plant can release into a river, but when that river gets to Ohio, those people have no recourse if there is no Federal standard.
Otherwise you haven't got a federal system at all, you've got a feudal system.
Be that as it may, thems the breaks.
LK
Law is words on paper, and people's willingness to act by those words. It goes no further. If Californians don't want to follow the law, they won't, and no amount of the feds crying "follow our laws or we'll make new ones!" will help.
But someone losing a civil judgement and having to pay Lexmark $150,000 WILL make a difference.
Since medical pot users are only supposed to consume small quantities, this doesn't happen unless a prosecutor is trying to make an example of someone, otherwise it's too expensive.
Do you have a TV? Do you watch it? Don't you remember Ashcroft sending the DEA and FBI to take people to jail for dispensing medical MJ?
LK
This is insightful? It shows ignorance of basic Constitutional issues, such as the 10th Amendment. The Constitution delegates states' power to the Central Gov't. If it ain't delegated explicitly, the power stays with the States. Copyright and patent _were_ delegated. Medicine certainly wasn't.
Your response shows an ignorance of case law and the preeminent judicial interpretation of the constitution. Congress is given the authority to regulate "interstate commerce", printers and ink are shipped and sold between states.
I'll quote the constitution for the benefit of the uninformed
Congress shall have the power...
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states and with the Indian Tribes
Guess what that means.
Californian state officials generally don't enforce the federal marijuana laws. They don't have to. That's why you get federal officers doing most of the drug-busting in California, which costs the federal government a load of cash and time.
True enough, but in this day and age of "homeland security" the feds have pretty deep pockets. I'm sure we've all seen the TV commercials about how buying a sack of weed will finance worldwide terrorism.
And what happens to people in California, when they're found guilty of growing or posessing medical marijuana? They get just one day in jail.
Until one of two things happen. When the feds need a new whipping boy, medical MJ is an easy target. Or, when the feds tie federal highway money to a state's laws on MJ, a state like CA that is already billions of dollars in debt will have no choice but to comply.
Now, apply this to ink. Granted, it's a lot different that marijuana laws - but, the state will wind up doing nothing to help the federal government in this matter, which is a big win. And it'll turn a blind-eye to anyone who wants to keep producing 3rd-party ink. Another win.
The carrot of federal dollars has a LOT to do with a state's laws. Have you ever wondered why every state in the union has a minimum drinking age of 21? Or why most states has a maximum speed limit of 55 (until about a decade ago)?
As a matter of principle you have to attack federal idiocy at the federal level.
The idea of nullification now'a'days is just to be such a pain in the ass that the federal government has to eventually rethink their position. Hell, look at all the anti-patriot act bills floating around.
If only more of my countrymen would learn about their right to jury nullification, we'd see fewer stupid laws on the books.
LK
The DMCA is federal. No matter how much we wish otherwise, we need to make the change at a federal level.
Even though California or Oregon voters may be in favor of medical marijuana, the federal prohibition on marijuana trumps that.
Repeal DMCA on a federal level, or otherwise the efforts are meaningless.
LK
However, if you truly believe in the right to free speech, you must be willing to take the good with the bad. Anyone who suggests anything else doesn't truly believe in free speech.
I don't see it that way. That is not the issue for many of us.
I believe that you have the right to be a holocaust revisionist, but I will not repeat, or relay your opinions on the matter.
I support your right to be a racist. I will not repeat or relay your opinions on the matter.
I support your right to be "pro-choice". I will not repeat or relay your opinions on the matter.
I believe in your right to access images on the internet. I will not be a party to your search for child pornography.
There is a difference between supporting the ideal of free speech and in being an active participant in someone else's speech.
LK
Arnie woulda handled it.
Not without alarming the entire base.
Argue all you want, but when it looks human and acts human, you're not going to think about whether or not you should thank him, especially when it clearly shows independent thought.
Argue all you want, the TX was mere inches away. It was stupid and annoying for him to stop. Yell a thank you back at the T800 when you've made it to safety.
LK
but what gets me about SCO's claim is that they say that even the comments in the source are the same as in their IP.
//This is the start of the program
Well, that makes sense. If the code is designed to handle a common, or inevitable problem then the comments would be the same.
IE
main (){
Has anyone else thought of this?
LK
Even on unmetered bandwidth, due you think that the ISP will soak up additional costs by cutting their salaries/profits? Chances are they will pass the increased costs onto the customer. And certainly, it won't be the spammer who pays.
How much spam do you get? In a month, I use less bandwitdh getting and disposing of spam than I use in two hours of web surfing. Hardly enough to cause my ISP to incur additional overhead.
LK
AOL Journals (named as such, since a survey showed the average user found the word 'blog' to be confusing)
Other users (like me) find the word 'blog' to be stupid. It sounds like a level one reaches in the Boy Scouts 'Webloes', 'Weblefs' and 'Weblogs'
LK
Spam costs me money.
Are you using metered bandwidth? How much per kilobyte do you pay?
Every time I open an email I don't want, every time I have to update my anti-spam software (well, that's free but that's besides the point) it costs me time and money and I object.
Every time a neophyte friend or relative forwards a virus warning hoax to you, it costs you time and money, should that be illegal too?
LK
Don't forget they had a Terminator with them.
I didn't. I have visited military bases. For non sensitive areas there is more security than there obviously was in this case.
So he's not going to be human anyway? Anybody would have done that. Besides, Arnie did something rather selfless.
As much as I love it a good song comes on the radio as I'm driving to work, I never thank my SUV or the stereo system in it. The terminator was a machine, doing what it was designed, built and programmed to do.
Skynet was born within the complex. It had the resources it needed there, and the other T-1s were protecting it. Nobody outside of the facility even knew what was going on.
No plot hole here, move along.
Huge gaping plothole here. When John tells Kate's father that he wants to stop Skynet, he would have instructed him to destroy the facility that they were in, if that was where Skynet resided. The T1s were not protecting anything in that building, they were killing as many people with knowledge about Skynet as possible. People who might survive the nuclear war and assist the human resistance years later.
Who say's its not a central machine 30 years from now?
Valid point. I did not think of that. Perhaps, when the humans win, it's Skynet XP or something that they are fighting.
1.) She liked him already. 2.) Who said anybody fell for anybody? The best you got was a handhold while John was stepping into the role he didn't want to be in.
She liked him 10 years before, and that handhold proves my point that she "started" to fall for John. I didn't assume that they started making babies that night.
1.) He was drinking to get over the trauma he suffered. That hardly makes him a boozer.
That is exactly what makes a boozer.
Even if it did, it's tough to imagine booze was widely available during the war.
Booze was available 5 thousand years ago, if they have energy weapons, making some wine is not going to be beyond their technology.
2.) He was pill popping because he injured his leg. 3.) What's one got to do with the other?
A whole bottle of pills, in one session? And they hinted that it wasn't the first time.
He had more knowledge about what was to happen than anybody else did. In a sense, the Terminators created John Connor.
Another valid point.
I know it's way too late to expect you to see this, but I caught your post after spotting the topic during metamod. I think you're overanalyzing the movie looking for faults in it, thus removing the fun for yourself.
I always check back for responses. I did enjoy the movie, but it could have been much better.
LK