Actually, I use a yahoo.com account for my junk, since their spam filters are better.
Not only are Yahoo's spam filters very good, but either they fight back at the isp level, or they just plain block some spam. I don't seem to get repeated spam like I do with conventional email addresses.
I've found that I've always had a problem with spam to my hotmail account.
I don't get any spam at all from hotmail, because when I click sign up all I see is this:
Microsoft®.NET Passport no longer supports the Web browser version you are using. Please upgrade to a current Web browser, such as Microsoft Internet Explorer version 4.0 or later, or Netscape Navigator version 4.08 or later.
It would be folly for us to expect our planet's climate to stay the way it is forever. For as long as we can look back the climate has been wildly fluctuating. However, if you are alive now, I can guarantee you that your ancestors survived the last ice age, and they managed to do it without any notable industry, technology, or global society.
Don't panic yet. Life is resilient and humans are resilient.
Given enough time, we'll eventually develop the technology to fix our climate where we like it. (Which will probably spark heated debates about where to set the global thermostat.) And in the interim, there's no good reason to panic.
.. uh is dead I thought.. I'd imagine it would be hard for him to say anything today...
Yes, but fortunately he was able to speak while alive and left us with some insightful quotes.
The one quoted in this Slashdot article, unfortunately, is often only half quoted. The full version is:
"I believe that the extraordinary should be pursued, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
-- Carl Sagan
Rather than a criticism of scientists who make extraordinary claims, this sounds to me more like a call to action to seek out the extraordinary evidence required for us to know the truth.
The words "confirm" and "require" are very strong, indeed.
Require is strong, yes, but perhaps you should consult the definition of confirm. It is an acceptable word to use, since it can also mean the same as to reinforce or support, which is basically what evidence does. Because of confirm's other meanings however, a word such as reinforce or support may have been clearer to those who don't understand how evidence works, and thus wouldn't think to use the other meaning of confirm.
Bacteria? If these are the only aliens you can come up with then LOOK HARDER.
Clearly you don't understand the true ramifications of this work. If there are alien bacteria, then not only is there intelligent life, but we also know that they're germy, and they sneeze all over the place. These are truly historic findings.
It's been just over three months since the last major release. Coincidence?
If there were a grand conspiracy, you could thwart them by paying $20 and subscribing for 4 months, after which you could then bellow a menacing laugh.
Well, yeah! I'd love to wait six hours to read a cool breaking story if it means I get to read the linked content or the mirrors have time to update. It sure beats waiting a day for the Slashdot effect to have worn off and for the servers to be responsive again, or pissing off all the mirror operators who now can't get at the content they intend to mirror.
If this is how you feel, then just read stories on Slashdot when they're six hours old. Slashdottings don't really last that long, it's only the top stories that get clobbered. If you see something posted and can't get to it, relax, go get some coffee, play a round of pool (or do some sysadminning, if they actually make you work), then come back and get what you need when the rush has worn down a little.
I understand you being concerned about security updates, but realistically, most security problems are in the wild before fixes are available anyway. System administration can't depend purely on getting the patch before the bad guy gets the exploit. Sooner or later that will fail.
Personally, if there are people out there who know something I use is vulnerable, I want to know as soon as possible, rather than wait until I'm sure I can get the patch.
If only it were that simple! Unfortunately, politicians "represent" us on a number of different topics. To some people, abortion is the most important, for others it might be guns, economy, military, spending in their district,...or DRM.
This is the severe weakness of a democracy that requires representation. Those who are eligible for office must both want it and have the rhetorical ability to acquire it. By the time the system reduces to the remaining candidates, it is impossible to choose a candidate based on his or her entire platform. Because of this almost every issue the voters care about must be ignored come election time, and decisions have to be made based on either a single special-interest issue or "general character", which is simply a product of commercials and rhetoric.
"Look, have YOU ever tried to hold a cat still and strap some friggin' TOAST to its back?"
Hmm, perhaps the experimental difficulty would be reduced if we neglected the toast, and simply buttered the cat. It would certainly simplify the design.
The cat can then land, feet 'down', on either the above surface or the below surface. There is no force trying to attract the cat's back to one of the surfaces
You could remedy this by simply securing the feline engine in between the two surfaces by using the tail as a pivot point. Then it would only be able to spin about this central point.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but somehow, people LOVE extraordinary claims and are seemingly happy to push forward with things in the absense of that extraordinary evidence.
Experimental results HAVE been observed and published. That's how science works.
Pirating software is still stealing software, no matter how you look at it.
Actually, copying software is only stealing software ONE way you look at it. To steal, you have to violate the boundaries of property and ownership. The boundaries of what are ownership is completely culturally specific. Some cultures have promoted slavery, ownership of people, such that if you freed a person who was owned, you were stealing. Most cultures today would call such ideas ludicrous, because we no longer accept that people can be owned.
You say copying software is absolutely and definitely stealing. This is only true if exclusive rights to a certain set of computer instructions can be "owned". There IS no absolute answer to that, and there can be no absolute answer to that.
Ownership is simply a mutual societal agreement. We all agree cars are owned, so we have created penalties for taking someone else's car. We don't think air is owned, so breathing air off of someone else's property does not require compensation.
Why then have some cultures chosen to consider sets of computer instructions ownable? The truth is, it's primarilly because people who thought they could profit from such an idea payed lawmakers to promote such an idea, and the idea spread. As soon as words such as "pirate" and "theft" were used, people started to get the idea that maybe software could be owned. Don't underestimate the value of labeling and defining something to change the public's view of the world.
Now we have a software "industry" that "produces" software which is "pirated" by a process of "software theft" by "hackers".
Just as easily we could have a "field of computer science" that "invents" software which is "shared" by a process of "scientific communication" by "scientists".
Those two paragraphs describe the exact same phenomenon. The first is a criminal act, the second a well respected act which benefits all of humanity. The only real difference is the labels, how we define things, and the cultural values which come from that.
As a person from Malaysia, you should respect that each culture has a right to choose its own cultural values. There's nothing inherently wrong with them choosing to think of it as sharing, education, scientific advancement, and the betterment of their society. The only think that is inherently wrong is for us to respond, "No, the way we look at it is absolute, and is the only way to see it!"
Slashdot Mirror
the conversational manner of his Paper is a nice change
If you want people to believe you are authoritative, you must speak like an authority. That's just a fact of human nature.
Hurd is almost audible.
Actually, I use a yahoo.com account for my junk, since their spam filters are better.
Not only are Yahoo's spam filters very good, but either they fight back at the isp level, or they just plain block some spam. I don't seem to get repeated spam like I do with conventional email addresses.
I've found that I've always had a problem with spam to my hotmail account.
.NET Passport no longer supports the Web browser version you are using. Please upgrade to a current Web browser, such as Microsoft Internet Explorer version 4.0 or later, or Netscape Navigator version 4.08 or later.
I don't get any spam at all from hotmail, because when I click sign up all I see is this:
Microsoft®
(When using galeon, which should work just fine.)
It would be folly for us to expect our planet's climate to stay the way it is forever. For as long as we can look back the climate has been wildly fluctuating. However, if you are alive now, I can guarantee you that your ancestors survived the last ice age, and they managed to do it without any notable industry, technology, or global society.
Don't panic yet. Life is resilient and humans are resilient.
Given enough time, we'll eventually develop the technology to fix our climate where we like it. (Which will probably spark heated debates about where to set the global thermostat.) And in the interim, there's no good reason to panic.
Yes, but fortunately he was able to speak while alive and left us with some insightful quotes.
The one quoted in this Slashdot article, unfortunately, is often only half quoted. The full version is:
"I believe that the extraordinary should be pursued, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
-- Carl Sagan
Rather than a criticism of scientists who make extraordinary claims, this sounds to me more like a call to action to seek out the extraordinary evidence required for us to know the truth.
The words "confirm" and "require" are very strong, indeed.
Require is strong, yes, but perhaps you should consult the definition of confirm. It is an acceptable word to use, since it can also mean the same as to reinforce or support, which is basically what evidence does. Because of confirm's other meanings however, a word such as reinforce or support may have been clearer to those who don't understand how evidence works, and thus wouldn't think to use the other meaning of confirm.
Bacteria? If these are the only aliens you can come up with then LOOK HARDER.
Clearly you don't understand the true ramifications of this work. If there are alien bacteria, then not only is there intelligent life, but we also know that they're germy, and they sneeze all over the place. These are truly historic findings.
It's been just over three months since the last major release. Coincidence?
If there were a grand conspiracy, you could thwart them by paying $20 and subscribing for 4 months, after which you could then bellow a menacing laugh.
I don't usually post this type of message.
PhysicsGenius is not a physicist, and almost every post he makes is ficticious. Check his posting history and then stop modding him up!
Of interest:
role of women produces 2,780,000 hits.
role of men produces 2,590,000 hits.
It would seem men are the under-studied gender by google-counting.
...when he died, I assume this was the other William Gibson.
Maybe he waited until he could read before he started collecting Sci-Fi... *shrug*
7. Microsoft's certificate authority which tells you to use a Floppy disk to store the key on? (now that is just whack!)
That's completely unnecessary! I'll just write it with my finger in the dust here beside my computer... That should be equally reliable.
Hey Taco can we get an RIAA linked story every hour or so for the next few days?
..."
Or they can just post stories with a sentence or two talking about random RIAA pages. "And here we have the README for
It is unlikely that anyone could get the same MD5 sum
If warez folk developed magic powers to undo one-way functions, the world would have much bigger problems than the security of your server.
Well, yeah! I'd love to wait six hours to read a cool breaking story if it means I get to read the linked content or the mirrors have time to update. It sure beats waiting a day for the Slashdot effect to have worn off and for the servers to be responsive again, or pissing off all the mirror operators who now can't get at the content they intend to mirror.
If this is how you feel, then just read stories on Slashdot when they're six hours old. Slashdottings don't really last that long, it's only the top stories that get clobbered. If you see something posted and can't get to it, relax, go get some coffee, play a round of pool (or do some sysadminning, if they actually make you work), then come back and get what you need when the rush has worn down a little.
I understand you being concerned about security updates, but realistically, most security problems are in the wild before fixes are available anyway. System administration can't depend purely on getting the patch before the bad guy gets the exploit. Sooner or later that will fail.
Personally, if there are people out there who know something I use is vulnerable, I want to know as soon as possible, rather than wait until I'm sure I can get the patch.
If only it were that simple! Unfortunately, politicians "represent" us on a number of different topics. To some people, abortion is the most important, for others it might be guns, economy, military, spending in their district, ...or DRM.
This is the severe weakness of a democracy that requires representation. Those who are eligible for office must both want it and have the rhetorical ability to acquire it. By the time the system reduces to the remaining candidates, it is impossible to choose a candidate based on his or her entire platform. Because of this almost every issue the voters care about must be ignored come election time, and decisions have to be made based on either a single special-interest issue or "general character", which is simply a product of commercials and rhetoric.
I wish someone knew a better system.
My non-disposable cell phone gets me 2000 minutes per month for around $100, or $0.20 per minute.
Actually, 5 cents, which makes your point even stronger.
"Look, have YOU ever tried to hold a cat still and strap some friggin' TOAST to its back?"
Hmm, perhaps the experimental difficulty would be reduced if we neglected the toast, and simply buttered the cat. It would certainly simplify the design.
The cat can then land, feet 'down', on either the above surface or the below surface. There is no force trying to attract the cat's back to one of the surfaces
You could remedy this by simply securing the feline engine in between the two surfaces by using the tail as a pivot point. Then it would only be able to spin about this central point.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, but somehow, people LOVE extraordinary claims and are seemingly happy to push forward with things in the absense of that extraordinary evidence.
Experimental results HAVE been observed and published. That's how science works.
And don't forget bras, there are millions of women around the world who would appreciate the "load reducing" capabilities of an anti-gravity bra.
This is unnecessary. We can just use rocket propulsion.
Is there a defence that can be devised? 180-out-of-phase speakers? What?
Physics majors, any answers?
Duck and cover.
Seriously, ultrasonic frequencies do a poor job of going through any barrier. It would make a lousy weapon compared with, say, a sniper rifle.
I've got something that has your invention beat by a mile...It's called a radio, see, and. . .
And you're building them without speakers?
Pirating software is still stealing software, no matter how you look at it.
Actually, copying software is only stealing software ONE way you look at it. To steal, you have to violate the boundaries of property and ownership. The boundaries of what are ownership is completely culturally specific. Some cultures have promoted slavery, ownership of people, such that if you freed a person who was owned, you were stealing. Most cultures today would call such ideas ludicrous, because we no longer accept that people can be owned.
You say copying software is absolutely and definitely stealing. This is only true if exclusive rights to a certain set of computer instructions can be "owned". There IS no absolute answer to that, and there can be no absolute answer to that.
Ownership is simply a mutual societal agreement. We all agree cars are owned, so we have created penalties for taking someone else's car. We don't think air is owned, so breathing air off of someone else's property does not require compensation.
Why then have some cultures chosen to consider sets of computer instructions ownable? The truth is, it's primarilly because people who thought they could profit from such an idea payed lawmakers to promote such an idea, and the idea spread. As soon as words such as "pirate" and "theft" were used, people started to get the idea that maybe software could be owned. Don't underestimate the value of labeling and defining something to change the public's view of the world.
Now we have a software "industry" that "produces" software which is "pirated" by a process of "software theft" by "hackers".
Just as easily we could have a "field of computer science" that "invents" software which is "shared" by a process of "scientific communication" by "scientists".
Those two paragraphs describe the exact same phenomenon. The first is a criminal act, the second a well respected act which benefits all of humanity. The only real difference is the labels, how we define things, and the cultural values which come from that.
As a person from Malaysia, you should respect that each culture has a right to choose its own cultural values. There's nothing inherently wrong with them choosing to think of it as sharing, education, scientific advancement, and the betterment of their society. The only think that is inherently wrong is for us to respond, "No, the way we look at it is absolute, and is the only way to see it!"