In the first spec, are users with such-and-such authorization allowed to change property yada?
Er, yes. Are you retarded or something?
No, I'm not. If you'd bother to read the sentence immediately after the one you quote, you'd see why I ask that question: "Although it implies it, the specification doesn't actually say that they can." You see, the reason they are called specifications is that you specify things in them. If you were supposed to just imply thing in them, they would be called implications.
But I'm sure you already really knew that your example had been shot down, which is why you resorted to personal attack ("Are you retarded") instead of trying to actually defend your position. I appreciate your acknowledging the error of your position by attempting to "defend" it with only a personal attack.
"Users without such-and-such authorisation may not change property yada".
"Only users with such-and-such authorisation may change property yada"
Don't try and tell me those aren't functionally equivalent.
Okay, but they aren't functionally equivalent. In the first spec, are users with such-and-such authorization allowed to change property yada? Although it implies it, the specification doesn't actually say that they can. The permission is actually undefined; the "unboundness" that the parent is talking about. The second specification is unambiguous about users with such-and-such being allowed to change the property.
Slashdot: We've got 'Friend' and 'Foe' designations; is it possible to make one that's 'Just Plain Stupid'?
Let's try to make this Obvious for ObviousGuy. Who owns AOL's servers? Do the spammers pay for them? Do the spammers pay for the electricity? Do the spammers pay for the OC3 to the internet? No, AOL pays for all of those. Therefore, since they own them, AOL gets to say how they are used.
You state you believe in the sanctity of Freedom of Speech. That's great. However, it's not being violated at all here. There's not a single thing that AOL has done that prevents the spammers from using their own money to say anything that they want. Rent billboards, print fliers and mail them, start their own online service and get subscribers to spam. All AOL has done is say that the spammers cannot use the resources of AOL to conduct the spammer's 'business'.
What was being violated here was private property rights. AOL owns the servers and pays for the data lines, they have the right to determine their use. Are you stating that you believe that a corporation does not have the right to determine how their assets are used, just because they are a corporation? That's the only way to read what you've posted about 'corporate control of rights'. No, they're trying to control their own assets...and so are you.
Can you tell me how come spam ads for p*nis enlargement is so much worse than snail mail ads for credit card applications?
The cost of spam is primarily borne by the recipient through increased cost to the recipient's ISP; the cost of snail-mail advertising is borne by the advertiser. Since it's difficult to avoid spam (that's why we have this whole topic each week), the spammer is forcing you to supplement his advertising budget or not have email. (In other words, spammers are theives.) With snail-mail advertising you are not supplementing anybody's advertising budget.
And why is spam so much worse...than the ads that appear on TV shows?
In part, see the answer above. Advertisers on TV shows pay the full amount for the delivery of the ad, no money comes out of your pocket for it. Additionally, with television advertising (as well as print advertising) you are receiving a benefit from it. In exchange for your watching the advertiser's ad, you are provided with an entertainment for free. In the case of the spammer, in exchange for receiving the advertisment, you are provided with a higher bill from your ISP. Where's any benefit to you?
Want to get rid of spam? Attack the problem, not the symptom: Curb your seemingly incessant need to spend money you don't have, on things you don't need. i.e. STOP CONSUMING.
I've never bought a single thing from spam that I've received. Are you saying that I'm just imagining the 80% spam that I receive each day? What's your plan for keeping everybody else from consuming? If you want to really attack the problem short-term, recognize that spamming is theft and start throwing the scum in jail. Long-term, SMTP needs to be re-vamped.
Jeez, I just responded to a clueless AC. I must be bored.
i hate spam to, but i don't think there is or should be anything illegal about it.
Okay, we'll leave out all the stuff about theft of service and such, and just stick to what the guy you're replying to was complaining about.
Imagine that a spammer didn't want to get all the bounce messages, complaints and death threats that the latest round of spam he was sending out was sure to elicit. So, he decides to forge the header on the message to have a 'From' and 'Reply-to' that has YOUR email address. (He only cares about people who click on the link in the message and go to the web site to order.) So now for every invalid address the spammer sends the message to, you get a bounce message in your mailbox. Every time somebody who gets the message hits the 'Reply' button and sends of a message saying, "Listen you no-good, mother-loving, slime-crawling, cess-pool polluting, lower-than-a-lawyer-who's-a-politician spammer, if I ever find out who you are I'm going to rip your head off and tie it back on to your arse with your own intestines", you'll get that message.
That's what the guy you were replying to was complaining about, and it's called a 'joe job'.
But hey, that's okay, because you don't think there's anything wrong with spam. Even though they are all theives, and they defame innocent people.
I know because a friend of mine got raided. The "tip" came from a business rival. The Marshals found everything was in order and the tipster got billed for the cost of the raid.
I hope your friend also filed a lawsuit against this business rival for production lost during the raid, defamation, and any property damages that occured.
Uhhh, if CSS makes you excited then, yeah, you're a geek. If it makes you excited over and over, then that makes you a hardcore geek. If you are unsure, use the "random unknown female test". Walk up to some random unknown female and say, "CSS makes me excited every time I learn new things about it. Does that make me a geek?". If she says, "Oh, I saw CSS on TV last night! That's so cool!", then you aren't a geek.
No, that just makes her not a geek. You'd still be one. Even though you're talking to a female.
The potential pitfall of this system could be where many documents have been written about the same subject i.e. testresult001.txt to testresult999.txt. The user would know with the traditional system that he wants testresult823.txt but with the new system would be presented with 1000 choices.
Attribute: sequence; Value: 823. Of course, then you could pull up the raw data, normalized data, draft of the test results and final report for just test 823 in one selection fairly easily, too.
ClickForMail was spamming me for five days. When I received the first, I noted that they weren't using open relays/proxies, had a valid web presence, and seemed to be trying to be as reputable as it's possible for a spammer to be. So I sent my standard stop-it form letter to a standard set of addresses (abuse@, postmaster@, root@, etc. for the web site and mail server).
Three days later I was still receiving from them, so I tracerouted and complained to the mail server's upstream provider (level3.net abuse). The next day I received another spam from them, but a different mail server. So I tracerouted that and complained to that mail server's upstream provider (bluehornet.com spamcomplaints).
And that's the last I heard from ClickForMail since May 21 this year. So it seems to be possible, if you complain loudly enough, to turn the flow off at its source. If you do have to go to upstreams, make sure to mention (as somebody else has done) that they are effectively performing a DoS on your system.
I'm going to go a little ways out on a limb here and say that you're right when you say that there are no Borland software improperly installed on the computers at work, while at the same time Borland's right that a product was registered on-line in the company's name. I'm willing to bet that what has happened is that one of your employees got a copy of some Borland product from "a friend of a friend of a friend" of the person who bought it, and they installed it on their home computer. They did the on-line registration, and since they work for you they put your company name in the registration field saying "Company" without even thinking about it. Borland's received several registrations for the same serial number, and so when this one comes in with your company name on it, they contact your company.
So, unless you also do an audit of your employees' private home computers (good luck!) I suspect that you're not going to find the software that Borland's complaining about.
It's also possible that Borland has a valid reason for not giving you the employee name under which this software was registered. If they realize that this scenario that I have outlined above may be the case, they might have also directly contacted that employee. If it turns out that he has not done anything wrong, then by giving you his name they might open themselves up to a slander suit by your employee.
Right, and everybody knows that the new millinium started with the year 2000. Sorry, facts aren't up for a vote. On the meridian is neither before it nor after it. Period. You may be wrong with a lot of people, but you're still wrong.
No, there actually is no such thing as 12 a.m. or 12 p.m. The abbreviation a.m. stands for 'ante meridian', while p.m. stands for 'post meridian'. A meridian is an imaginary circle that includes the north and south poles of the Earth. Ante means before, and post means after.
The abbrevition a.m. thus means that period before when the sun reaches directly above a circle containing the north pole, south pole and a reference mark, while p.m. means that period after when the sun reaches directly above that circle.
At noon, the sun is directly over the meridian. Since it is directly over it, it is neither before it, nor is it after it. Therefore, noon itself can be neither a.m. nor p.m. Similarly, at midnight the sun changes from being post meridian for the old day, and ante meridian for the new day. At the instant of midnight it is neither; the sun is once again directly over the meridian (it's a circle, remember?) and not on one side or the other.
So if you specify a time of 12:00:00.000001 a.m. it is quite clear that you are talking about 1 microsecond after midnight; however, a time of 12:00 a.m. is vague (and can't really exist). Which explains why a lot of people on the LoTR thread were talking about seeing the movie at 12:01 a.m.
We lost control when
1. Congress became a full time job and
2. When it started costing Millions of Dollars to run for office.
Close. We lost control when
the Interstate Commerece Clause of the Constitution stopped being interpreted as giving the Federal Government control over trade between States only during the actual conduct of that trade, and started being interpreted as giving the Federal Government creation to destruction control over anything that might ever be involved in trade between the States; and
the Supreme Court went along with it
This made the Federal Government hold a lot more power than it had been intended to have, and thus made it more attractive to have Congress as a career. It also increased competition for the seats, leading to the massive fund raising needed today.
Scale back the reach of the Interstate Commerece Clause to where it had been intended, and you'll scale down the centralized powers of the Federal Government (redistributing them back to the States where they were intended) and those two issues you mentioned will pretty much go away.
Under Bill(s) 1618 TITLE III by the 105 US Congress, per Section 301, Paragraph(a)(2)of S. 1618, a letter cannot be considered Spam if the sender includes contact information and a method of "removal".
Too bad for them that it was a Senate bill (thus the 'S. 1618'; House bills would be 'H.B. 1618') that died in committee. Basically means that two senators proposed the law to pay back their campaign supporters, but not enough other senators had received contributions from the spammers to convince them to even bring it to a vote. Passed by Congress? Not even passed by a committee in one of the houses. Or signed by the President.
Hmmmm... That sets one to thinking. What you basically seem to be stating is that the reason China allows (encourages?) open relays is that it presents more benefit than harm to them.
So to make them want to take care of open relays, those open relays would have to be preceived by them as causing more harm than good. How can this be done? By using the open relays to do something that they don't want. I would suspect that if those open relays started being used to send messages promoting Falun Dafa or other ideas that PRC doesn't want to addresses in China, we'd start seeing China pay more attention to the relays.
Of course, I'm just postulating this as a student of human responses. I'm not encouraging anybody to ever actually do this. This also doesn't address if there are any benefits that Chinese opposed to the PRC derive from the open relays, and if encouraging closing of the open relays would harm them.
Hey, take it easy on him. He probably makes his living out of sending spam, and he's got to try to justify it to us if he's ever going to be able to justify it to himself. Just don't remind him that he's a thief, and he's raising the costs at our ISPs for everybody. If 36% of the email traffic is now spam, doesn't that mean that probably about 10% of our provier's bill is due to spam?
So, if a spammer wants somebody to respect them more, do they actually lie and say that they're a lawyer for the MPAA?
The Rolling Stones' Bill Wyman's lawyer wrote that the Atlanta Journal-Contitution's Bill Wyman was engaged in:
a seriously misleading and, arguably, an intentional, unauthorized exploitation of our client's name, goodwill and publicity value.
I'm not a lawyer, but since AJC' Bill Wyman had the name first, accusing him of exploitation sounds like a defamatory statement. Bill Wyman from Atlanta should get a civil lawyer; he could probably get six figures out of this.
When the SCOTUS rules along party lines, against personal precedent, in order to install a POTUS,...
Nice try. However, let's try to stay based in reality. Basic summary: US Constitution Article II gives the state legislatures sole and total discretion on how to choose the state's electors for POTUS. Florida Legislature set a deadline date of November 14 for certifying results. At the request of the Gore campaign, the Florida Supreme Court (1 Independent and the rest Democrat) legislated from the bench and extended that date to November 26. SCOTUS, along party lines, said correctly that the Florida Supreme Court did not have that power (remember--US Constitution gives total control to state Legislature). In a second case, SCOFL re-instated their November 26 date, and the election results were certified on that date. (SCOFL also went on to order certification of some votes after the November 26 date.)
After the results were certified (including only a parital recount of Miami-Dade), the Gore campaign contested the results. Because the SCOFL had moved the certification date from November 14 to November 26 while the date that electors had to be transmitted to Congress had not changed, and the fact that the law does not allow results to be contested until they are certified, the contest phase was shortened by 12 days. In response to the contest, a manual re-examination of undervotes was ordered. From the SCOTUS decision: "The (SCOFL ordered) recount process...is inconsistent with the minimum procedures necessary to protect the fundamental right of each voter..." Thus, in a 7-2 vote (see p.12 of the decision) the SCOTUS declared that the procedures set up by the SCOFL were unconstitutional. That's not a 5-4 party-line vote. However, at the same time this decision was handed down the SCOTUS decided 5-4 that due to the short period of time before the electors had to be certified on December 12, there was no feasible way to conduct a recount that would protect the Equal Protection rights of all the voters, and so the SCOTUS would not require such recount.
Two things here are really interesting. First, the SCOTUS vote that gets all the media mention is not the 7-2 vote that the SCOFL process violated Equal Protection, but the 5-4 vote to not issue a decision requiring the state to do something impossible. Second, what really threw the monkey wrench into the whole thing was the Gore campaign's request to the SCOFL to violate the US Constitution and extend the protest (pre-certification of the votes) phase at the expense of time for the contest phase. That basically forced the SCOTUS to issue the 7-2 decision that it did, due to the lack of time before the December 12 deadline.
So, yes, you can claim a ruling "along party lines", as long as you ignore the real ruling, or assume that the SCOTUS should make rulings that violate the Constitution.
Right! Our programs had to finish in the morning, at ten o'clock at night, half an hour before they were submitted, solve NP-complete problems, leave more memory free than the computer had, and when we'd go to the computer room the operator would kill us and dance around on our graves, singing Hallelujah!
And you try and tell the young people of today that, and they won't believe you!
I worked on a system that generated transaction tracking numbers in base 36 (a-z, 0-9). We would occasionally have to intercept the "blue" numbers...
Been there, done that for temporary file names. The correct answer: use base 31 (just like base 36 but exclude aeiou). No additional processing to see if you've created a bad word, because without the five main vowels you're not going to be creating many words. Any "bad words" that a user complains about can be attributed to their dirty mind and not your dirty program, so it's pretty safe to use where a user might see it.
I can't claim credit for coming up with this plan, though. I got it from the book _Programming as if People Mattered_, by Nathaneil S. Borenstein, which has several other examples of off-beat error messages and broken user interfaces.
Chris Beckenbach
Re:"Your erroneous pink rabbit has been ignored"
on
Gnarly Error Messages
·
· Score: 2
I guess this is where the RPG-II ones go...
I once programmed a report on an B10 AS/400 in System/36 compatibility mode that produced a sales revenue summary. The sales department wanted the figures ordered and sub-totaled one way (Region/Salesman) and the finance department wanted the figures ordred another way (General Ledger Account Number). So this report consisted of one program to gather the summary numbers to a work file, one program to print the work file in Sales Department format, and one program to print in Finance Department format. This was front-ended with a program that would ask for the date range and how many copies of the report were desired in each format.
If you requested 0 copies for Finance and 0 copies for Sales, it would display a message, "So what's the point?" and exit, without running any of the other programs.
No, you're looking at the extended ASCII chart. What this is talking about is Unicode. A Unicode 0x0085 is the control character NEL (http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U0080.pdf, page 3) NEL is NExt Line.
I'm sorry, but I hae trumpted you all: I have "6048 Sad, Silent, Lonely Hours" under my name. (This is 36 weeks * 7 days * 24 hours BTW)
You seem to be infringing on my seminal work, The Song of the Universe: A Sixteen Billion Year Retrospective. I'm still looking for a publisher of the 105,193,000,000,000 80-minute CD set, so if you know anybody who's interested, let me know. It really starts off with a bang, and the next few hundred million years are a seething malestrom of pure energy, eventually resolving to a more sedate work. Your "Sad, Silent, Lonley Hours" seem to match a section of my work that started 137,518,824 years 15 weeks two days five hours ago (give or take a little).
Slashdot Mirror
But I'm sure you already really knew that your example had been shot down, which is why you resorted to personal attack ("Are you retarded") instead of trying to actually defend your position. I appreciate your acknowledging the error of your position by attempting to "defend" it with only a personal attack.
Chris
Chris
Let's try to make this Obvious for ObviousGuy. Who owns AOL's servers? Do the spammers pay for them? Do the spammers pay for the electricity? Do the spammers pay for the OC3 to the internet? No, AOL pays for all of those. Therefore, since they own them, AOL gets to say how they are used.
You state you believe in the sanctity of Freedom of Speech. That's great. However, it's not being violated at all here. There's not a single thing that AOL has done that prevents the spammers from using their own money to say anything that they want. Rent billboards, print fliers and mail them, start their own online service and get subscribers to spam. All AOL has done is say that the spammers cannot use the resources of AOL to conduct the spammer's 'business'.
What was being violated here was private property rights. AOL owns the servers and pays for the data lines, they have the right to determine their use. Are you stating that you believe that a corporation does not have the right to determine how their assets are used, just because they are a corporation? That's the only way to read what you've posted about 'corporate control of rights'. No, they're trying to control their own assets...and so are you.
Chris
Jeez, I just responded to a clueless AC. I must be bored.
Chris
Chris
Imagine that a spammer didn't want to get all the bounce messages, complaints and death threats that the latest round of spam he was sending out was sure to elicit. So, he decides to forge the header on the message to have a 'From' and 'Reply-to' that has YOUR email address. (He only cares about people who click on the link in the message and go to the web site to order.) So now for every invalid address the spammer sends the message to, you get a bounce message in your mailbox. Every time somebody who gets the message hits the 'Reply' button and sends of a message saying, "Listen you no-good, mother-loving, slime-crawling, cess-pool polluting, lower-than-a-lawyer-who's-a-politician spammer, if I ever find out who you are I'm going to rip your head off and tie it back on to your arse with your own intestines", you'll get that message.
That's what the guy you were replying to was complaining about, and it's called a 'joe job'.
But hey, that's okay, because you don't think there's anything wrong with spam. Even though they are all theives, and they defame innocent people.
Chris Beckenbach
Chris Beckenbach
Chris
Chris Beckenbach
Chris
Three days later I was still receiving from them, so I tracerouted and complained to the mail server's upstream provider (level3.net abuse). The next day I received another spam from them, but a different mail server. So I tracerouted that and complained to that mail server's upstream provider (bluehornet.com spamcomplaints).
And that's the last I heard from ClickForMail since May 21 this year. So it seems to be possible, if you complain loudly enough, to turn the flow off at its source. If you do have to go to upstreams, make sure to mention (as somebody else has done) that they are effectively performing a DoS on your system.
Chris Beckenbach
So, unless you also do an audit of your employees' private home computers (good luck!) I suspect that you're not going to find the software that Borland's complaining about.
It's also possible that Borland has a valid reason for not giving you the employee name under which this software was registered. If they realize that this scenario that I have outlined above may be the case, they might have also directly contacted that employee. If it turns out that he has not done anything wrong, then by giving you his name they might open themselves up to a slander suit by your employee.
Chris Beckenbach
Chris Beckenbach
The abbrevition a.m. thus means that period before when the sun reaches directly above a circle containing the north pole, south pole and a reference mark, while p.m. means that period after when the sun reaches directly above that circle.
At noon, the sun is directly over the meridian. Since it is directly over it, it is neither before it, nor is it after it. Therefore, noon itself can be neither a.m. nor p.m. Similarly, at midnight the sun changes from being post meridian for the old day, and ante meridian for the new day. At the instant of midnight it is neither; the sun is once again directly over the meridian (it's a circle, remember?) and not on one side or the other.
So if you specify a time of 12:00:00.000001 a.m. it is quite clear that you are talking about 1 microsecond after midnight; however, a time of 12:00 a.m. is vague (and can't really exist). Which explains why a lot of people on the LoTR thread were talking about seeing the movie at 12:01 a.m.
Chris Beckenbach
- the Interstate Commerece Clause of the Constitution stopped being interpreted as giving the Federal Government control over trade between States only during the actual conduct of that trade, and started being interpreted as giving the Federal Government creation to destruction control over anything that might ever be involved in trade between the States; and
- the Supreme Court went along with it
This made the Federal Government hold a lot more power than it had been intended to have, and thus made it more attractive to have Congress as a career. It also increased competition for the seats, leading to the massive fund raising needed today.Scale back the reach of the Interstate Commerece Clause to where it had been intended, and you'll scale down the centralized powers of the Federal Government (redistributing them back to the States where they were intended) and those two issues you mentioned will pretty much go away.
Chris Beckenbach
Chris Beckenbach
So to make them want to take care of open relays, those open relays would have to be preceived by them as causing more harm than good. How can this be done? By using the open relays to do something that they don't want. I would suspect that if those open relays started being used to send messages promoting Falun Dafa or other ideas that PRC doesn't want to addresses in China, we'd start seeing China pay more attention to the relays.
Of course, I'm just postulating this as a student of human responses. I'm not encouraging anybody to ever actually do this. This also doesn't address if there are any benefits that Chinese opposed to the PRC derive from the open relays, and if encouraging closing of the open relays would harm them.
Chris Beckenbach
So, if a spammer wants somebody to respect them more, do they actually lie and say that they're a lawyer for the MPAA?
Chris Beckenbach
Chris Beckenbach
After the results were certified (including only a parital recount of Miami-Dade), the Gore campaign contested the results. Because the SCOFL had moved the certification date from November 14 to November 26 while the date that electors had to be transmitted to Congress had not changed, and the fact that the law does not allow results to be contested until they are certified, the contest phase was shortened by 12 days. In response to the contest, a manual re-examination of undervotes was ordered. From the SCOTUS decision: "The (SCOFL ordered) recount process...is inconsistent with the minimum procedures necessary to protect the fundamental right of each voter..." Thus, in a 7-2 vote (see p.12 of the decision) the SCOTUS declared that the procedures set up by the SCOFL were unconstitutional. That's not a 5-4 party-line vote. However, at the same time this decision was handed down the SCOTUS decided 5-4 that due to the short period of time before the electors had to be certified on December 12, there was no feasible way to conduct a recount that would protect the Equal Protection rights of all the voters, and so the SCOTUS would not require such recount.
Two things here are really interesting. First, the SCOTUS vote that gets all the media mention is not the 7-2 vote that the SCOFL process violated Equal Protection, but the 5-4 vote to not issue a decision requiring the state to do something impossible. Second, what really threw the monkey wrench into the whole thing was the Gore campaign's request to the SCOFL to violate the US Constitution and extend the protest (pre-certification of the votes) phase at the expense of time for the contest phase. That basically forced the SCOTUS to issue the 7-2 decision that it did, due to the lack of time before the December 12 deadline.
So, yes, you can claim a ruling "along party lines", as long as you ignore the real ruling, or assume that the SCOTUS should make rulings that violate the Constitution.
Chris Beckenbach
And you try and tell the young people of today that, and they won't believe you!
I can't claim credit for coming up with this plan, though. I got it from the book _Programming as if People Mattered_, by Nathaneil S. Borenstein, which has several other examples of off-beat error messages and broken user interfaces.
Chris Beckenbach
I once programmed a report on an B10 AS/400 in System/36 compatibility mode that produced a sales revenue summary. The sales department wanted the figures ordered and sub-totaled one way (Region/Salesman) and the finance department wanted the figures ordred another way (General Ledger Account Number). So this report consisted of one program to gather the summary numbers to a work file, one program to print the work file in Sales Department format, and one program to print in Finance Department format. This was front-ended with a program that would ask for the date range and how many copies of the report were desired in each format.
If you requested 0 copies for Finance and 0 copies for Sales, it would display a message, "So what's the point?" and exit, without running any of the other programs.
Chris Beckenbach
Chris Beckenbach
Chris Beckenbach
(Is the horse dead yet?)