Who else is going to put pressure on them to fix it? They don't get any money from me, so they aren't going to listen to me. But users saying "My contacts won't send me mail, or can't, because of your policies, so I'm going to stop giving you money" is more likely to do something. I see it as shooting yourself in the foot by NOT doing anything about it.
I have to deal with it, and I choose to deal with it by not supporting the practice by not conforming to it and providing incentive to use ISPs that do not filter mail this way without user consent.
Anyway, running my own smtp server set to "relay localhost" means that any message I send through it can have any originating address I want it to have, because I set it that way.
I already can't send to a friend who uses AOL because AOL thinks I'm a spammer just because I use Postfix on my OS X laptop to send mail so I can send mail from anywhere using any of my (all legitimate) return addresses. I could spoof my return address and be a spammer, but I'm not.
AOL doesn't even try to test my messages for spam content. They just... vanish.
Consequently, I've told this friend that until she gets an ISP that follows standards like the rest of the net does, I won't even bother to try sending her mail. I think I was told once that I was being a twit, but am I? I don't think so. I'm providing incentive to dump an ISP that is intentionally causing harm to a vital resource of the net.
Yes, the costs are high... but as has been pointed out here, they have to be, at least in the beginning.
Because PLoS is an effort to bring research to the general public or at least to more people than has generally been the case, it can't get its operating fees from charging people to view the articles online, the way Nature and Science do. Because those journals lock down their content so tightly, I can't share a paper with friends.
For example, I'm a member of an online community that likes to talk about birds of prey, but I couldn't share a Science article with them that discussed tool use in crows, because I was the only one of the bunch who works somewhere that has a site license! And the university has paid dearly, no doubt, for it. The only way for me to do it would be to put the PDF version of the paper up for download, or send it to them directly -- legal, I think, for private discussion use as long as it's not redistributed, though I'd have to read their site before doing anything like that.
PLoS is aiming to change that. If the same article had been published in PLoS Biology, all that would have been needed is the URL. But, they need to get funding to get themselves started. $1500 may seem steep, but not only are grants often providing hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars, the $1500 cost can just be added to grant expenses. Some would balk, sure, but...
Some journals still charge some kind of fee to publish, in any case -- for example, to reprint color images, which is more expensive than black and white due to the costlier processes involved in reprinting in color (four inks, for example, not just one, but that's just the start.) But many authors are willing to pay the extra required for color because color has a greater impact on readers (this has been known for a long time) and because some things just can't be shown in greyscale, like two different dyes being used to tag two different proteins in the same cell.
I think it will be an accepted expense fairly soon, and if PLoS can actually publish each article for less, and start building up a cash reserve, the costs can perhaps be lowered for those who really can't afford it.
The flight tests at this point are comparable to the ALT (approach and landing test) program that was flown from about 1977 until 1979 using an unpowered glider-only version of the Space Shuttle -- it had fake engine nozzles, no real tiles, and had fake tile patterns to make it look mostly like the real thing (presumably this is painted on; I haven't seen Enterprise in person yet, but will late this year or early next). (The imagery of it in the introduction to the TV series of the same name is incorrect -- the name is in the wrong place, and the "tile" color pattern is completely incorrect and should only be found on space-capable orbiters, so I think the photo was created by digitally placing the Enterprise name onto a photo of one of the other orbiters.)
This vehicle is better known as OV-101 Enterprise, and the carrier aircraft was a Boeing 747 once owned by American Airlines (at that time, if one looked at it from the right angle, "American" could still be seen on the fuselage. It's since been repainted white with a blue stripe at window level.)
The ALT program followed much the same pattern as the SS1 tests: first, unmanned captive carry flights, then manned captive carry flights, then manned glide flights (some without a tailcone, some with.) At no point were any engines ignited, and in fact no real engines were ever fitted, although the vehicle was weighted to behave like the real thing.
On the fifth drop test, an oscillation problem was found in the flight controls that caused Enterprise to wobble drunkenly upon final approach and land rather hard. This was investigated further with a fly-by-wire F-8 and fixed for the first flight of a space-qualified Shuttle, two years later in 1981. Thus, it is to be expected that problems will be uncovered in glide testing (which is the point). I think a powered manned suborbital flight will be possible within a year from now -- provided no other major problems are uncovered.
Trains were a bigger novelty when they were new, especially during the Age of Steam. Now, the big novelties are stupid little AA-battery-eating gizmos that bloop and bleep and play bad boy-band music. No thanks.:p
Marklin is terribly expensive, from everything I've heard. I prefer HO; similarly sized to the common 1/72 scale model kits, so it's not that hard to slip a 1/72 scale airplane into a layout, or vice versa. And they're large enough to put a lot of details onto without taking excessive amounts of space for displaying.... though I can't wait to build the 1/32-scale F-4 Phantom kit I've got...
... to claim they didn't know that these things might be illegal. After all, they're saying things like 'the RIAA should go after Kazaa' and 'I didn't know I was sharing' and so on.
News flash: You're complaining about something that's been done already. The RIAA did go after Kazaa, and a judge ruled that the service itself is legal. Just like VCRs are legal even though you could copy rental tapes. But oh wait, you didn't know these crazy people at the RIAA are throwing lawsuits around without investigating who they're actually suing, so you obviously didn't RTFA (like people like to say here on slashdot). I know the case is being appealed, but it seems to me that if a judge is going to strike down the existing ruling, then he'd better start declaring all VCRs illegal contraband.
News flash: If you didn't open up the preferences and look for whatever checkbox that Kazaa (or whatever client you have) might have that says "Enable file sharing" and figure that if it's checked, you might be, oh, I don't know, sharing files... you deserve what you got.
I personally check preferences to see what I can tweak as one of the first things I do after installing a new application. So I assume that it's controllable. And I bet that it's defaulted to on, precisely because most people are too lazy to check their preferences, so if it defaulted to off, there would be no network.
Sorry for the rant -- it just amazes me how dumb people seem to be. I guess it's a prerequisite for getting in the news these days.
I work at WUSM and I don't recall us getting our access cut off due to worms etc but I'm sure you remember the day our net access died (according to my email history, the 15th). I'm not sure what was up with that. Know anything?
The lab I work in did get hit by Klez but the sysadmin for the department took the machine offline til I patched it up. (I'm still not sure why NAV quit working...) We have a pile of immune-to-almost-everything Macs (OS9 except for my Powerbook, which runs OSX), one Win2k machine (firewalled and virus-scanned like crazy automatically), and one NT4 box (which has no net access, I set 'deny *' rules in the TCP/IP settings on the NIC). The only reason we're still using NT4 is that it's a workstation for a microscope and to update to Win2K would require updating/replacing the weird proprietary 1394 card the microscope vendor installs.
At home I have an XP Corporate box with a hardware firewall/router (really, a Netgear MR314), an automatically updated virus scanner, and a software firewall. If it weren't for games and apps like X-Plane I'd have wiped it ages ago and switched to Linux...
I still do have to put up with the PI occasionally asking "What's this piffy file thingy?" Me: *yawn* "It's a windows virus. Just delete it." "Oh... You're sure it's not going to infect me?" "Yes, I'm sure."
Guess who makes the most money out of the two of us?:P
It is. But it could also be made into living space. Skylab, after all, was nothing more than a converted S-IVB stage (designed to send Apollo spacecraft toward the moon as well as provide the final boost into Earth parking orbit) and the living space was placed in the fuel tank.
The Apollo Telescope Mount and forward part of the station, which contained docking ports, an airlock (modified from a Gemini capsule hatch), and other research instruments) was placed in the space where the Lunar Module once sat.
It worked well til NASA took too long to get off its butt and finish the space shuttle, and fell into the atmosphere in 1979. Parts of it landed in Australia.
Don't they have to use law enforcement (the courts) to bring a case? Would the court not have the power to throw out evidence that wasn't gathered correctly? I hear of this happening all the time -- which is why there are strict procedures covering the handling of evidence. It has to be collected within strict rules (e.g. to search a home a warrant is needed) and then it has to be kept "clean". If it's tainted, the case can be thrown out.
I don't see why everyone's so quick to dismiss the claims. Well, the RIAA is obviously biased, but third parties should technically be not so biased.
I have yet to see any, and I'm not sure how hopeful to be. I don't need the extra speed too badly at home but at work it would have been nice. Alas, no dice... yet.
g is pretty easy to make backward compatible because it's on the same frequency. a is not. But you still see a fair number of tri-mode routers out there.
But it won't be backwards compatible, so that way you'll have to buy a whole new laptop. Almost guaranteed. I thought the 802.11g equipment would be retrofittable because the antennas were the same. Nope! New form factor! Either put up with an ugly dongle that ruins the point of having a laptop, or pay us $3000 for a new one.
If you're referring to the shuttle's external tank, this has been suggested in the past. The ET already makes it most of the way to orbit on its own (it burns up and is the only component that is not reused.) It wouldn't be all that hard to add a kick motor to the underside of the tank. However, the proposals never went anywhere.
Summary of the anti-RIAA/MPAA version, in plain-English for non-B5 fans:
---
When faced with subpoenas and threats to shut down and fall in line ("we're a police state, we can do whatever the hell we want, so start bending over, oh, and we aren't giving you any KY") the response was "Oh yeah!?!?! We're not going to do what you tell us, because you SUCK, so do your stupid rules, no two-week notice, we are OUT!"
When the feds came after them, the response was "We have bigger friends than you. Look, here they come now..." Their friends jump in from out of nowhere: "We have bigger guns -- errrrr, lawyers -- than you. The only one of you who has ever survived is behind us [Grokster waves and looks smug]. You're in front of our legal guns. Go away, you MPAA commie bastards!"
The feds then run like hell because they know they're about to get lawyered and judged out of existence if they stick around. Much cheering ensues.
The feds keep creating more rules and more excuses, and keep piling more and more guns -- er, lawyers -- onto the case, and keep sending veiled threats. So the station merely goes out and talks to all its friends and gets them to chase off any bad guys -- er, lawyers -- who might show up.
This goes on for a while, until finally the bad guys learn their lesson and get their butts kicked, but not after trying, and failing, to steal technology from some even older bad guys (um, who would that be in this spoof? uhhhh...) who drive around in weird black crablike things. Hmmm. Must be SUV drivers... yeah, that's it!
The guy responsible for passing all the bad laws finally loses and kills himself like any good villain, after one last rant about "new-kew-lar" stuff.. Last attempt to make a horrible mess is foiled. Much cheering ensues.
The End.
---
I'm two DVDs away from running out of season-3 episodes. I can't find the fourth season up for preorder on amazon yet. Arrrrrrgggh! I want my B5!!!
Slashdot Mirror
Like I said. Not doing anything will DEFINITELY not get anything done.
You're deluding yourself if you think otherwise. Seriously.
Who else is going to put pressure on them to fix it? They don't get any money from me, so they aren't going to listen to me. But users saying "My contacts won't send me mail, or can't, because of your policies, so I'm going to stop giving you money" is more likely to do something. I see it as shooting yourself in the foot by NOT doing anything about it.
I have to deal with it, and I choose to deal with it by not supporting the practice by not conforming to it and providing incentive to use ISPs that do not filter mail this way without user consent.
Anyway, running my own smtp server set to "relay localhost" means that any message I send through it can have any originating address I want it to have, because I set it that way.
I already can't send to a friend who uses AOL because AOL thinks I'm a spammer just because I use Postfix on my OS X laptop to send mail so I can send mail from anywhere using any of my (all legitimate) return addresses. I could spoof my return address and be a spammer, but I'm not.
... vanish.
AOL doesn't even try to test my messages for spam content. They just
Consequently, I've told this friend that until she gets an ISP that follows standards like the rest of the net does, I won't even bother to try sending her mail. I think I was told once that I was being a twit, but am I? I don't think so. I'm providing incentive to dump an ISP that is intentionally causing harm to a vital resource of the net.
You could just view the album and add all the tracks other than the one you bought into your shopping cart, then buy them that way.
When it comes to brains, they've got the lion's share.
...
But when it comes to brute strength (in number of users)
I'm afraid their network's at the shallow end of the gene pool.
Yes, the costs are high ... but as has been pointed out here, they have to be, at least in the beginning.
...
Because PLoS is an effort to bring research to the general public or at least to more people than has generally been the case, it can't get its operating fees from charging people to view the articles online, the way Nature and Science do. Because those journals lock down their content so tightly, I can't share a paper with friends.
For example, I'm a member of an online community that likes to talk about birds of prey, but I couldn't share a Science article with them that discussed tool use in crows, because I was the only one of the bunch who works somewhere that has a site license! And the university has paid dearly, no doubt, for it. The only way for me to do it would be to put the PDF version of the paper up for download, or send it to them directly -- legal, I think, for private discussion use as long as it's not redistributed, though I'd have to read their site before doing anything like that.
PLoS is aiming to change that. If the same article had been published in PLoS Biology, all that would have been needed is the URL. But, they need to get funding to get themselves started. $1500 may seem steep, but not only are grants often providing hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars, the $1500 cost can just be added to grant expenses. Some would balk, sure, but
Some journals still charge some kind of fee to publish, in any case -- for example, to reprint color images, which is more expensive than black and white due to the costlier processes involved in reprinting in color (four inks, for example, not just one, but that's just the start.) But many authors are willing to pay the extra required for color because color has a greater impact on readers (this has been known for a long time) and because some things just can't be shown in greyscale, like two different dyes being used to tag two different proteins in the same cell.
I think it will be an accepted expense fairly soon, and if PLoS can actually publish each article for less, and start building up a cash reserve, the costs can perhaps be lowered for those who really can't afford it.
The flight tests at this point are comparable to the ALT (approach and landing test) program that was flown from about 1977 until 1979 using an unpowered glider-only version of the Space Shuttle -- it had fake engine nozzles, no real tiles, and had fake tile patterns to make it look mostly like the real thing (presumably this is painted on; I haven't seen Enterprise in person yet, but will late this year or early next). (The imagery of it in the introduction to the TV series of the same name is incorrect -- the name is in the wrong place, and the "tile" color pattern is completely incorrect and should only be found on space-capable orbiters, so I think the photo was created by digitally placing the Enterprise name onto a photo of one of the other orbiters.)
This vehicle is better known as OV-101 Enterprise, and the carrier aircraft was a Boeing 747 once owned by American Airlines (at that time, if one looked at it from the right angle, "American" could still be seen on the fuselage. It's since been repainted white with a blue stripe at window level.)
The ALT program followed much the same pattern as the SS1 tests: first, unmanned captive carry flights, then manned captive carry flights, then manned glide flights (some without a tailcone, some with.) At no point were any engines ignited, and in fact no real engines were ever fitted, although the vehicle was weighted to behave like the real thing.
On the fifth drop test, an oscillation problem was found in the flight controls that caused Enterprise to wobble drunkenly upon final approach and land rather hard. This was investigated further with a fly-by-wire F-8 and fixed for the first flight of a space-qualified Shuttle, two years later in 1981. Thus, it is to be expected that problems will be uncovered in glide testing (which is the point). I think a powered manned suborbital flight will be possible within a year from now -- provided no other major problems are uncovered.
My fortune was "Mind your own business, Spock. I'm sick of your halfbreed interference."
Great. So now SCO is run by a bunch of Vulcans. I prefer to think they're Romulan scum because Vulcans would never do anything this stupid.
You forgot the Beowulf clusters. :)
Trains were a bigger novelty when they were new, especially during the Age of Steam. Now, the big novelties are stupid little AA-battery-eating gizmos that bloop and bleep and play bad boy-band music. No thanks. :p
How old do you have to be before you're not a kid anymore? :)
Check out Model Railroader magazine sometime. Or Trains magazine.
Marklin is terribly expensive, from everything I've heard. I prefer HO; similarly sized to the common 1/72 scale model kits, so it's not that hard to slip a 1/72 scale airplane into a layout, or vice versa. And they're large enough to put a lot of details onto without taking excessive amounts of space for displaying. ... though I can't wait to build the 1/32-scale F-4 Phantom kit I've got ...
Inquiring minds want to know...
... to claim they didn't know that these things might be illegal. After all, they're saying things like 'the RIAA should go after Kazaa' and 'I didn't know I was sharing' and so on.
... you deserve what you got.
News flash: You're complaining about something that's been done already. The RIAA did go after Kazaa, and a judge ruled that the service itself is legal. Just like VCRs are legal even though you could copy rental tapes. But oh wait, you didn't know these crazy people at the RIAA are throwing lawsuits around without investigating who they're actually suing, so you obviously didn't RTFA (like people like to say here on slashdot). I know the case is being appealed, but it seems to me that if a judge is going to strike down the existing ruling, then he'd better start declaring all VCRs illegal contraband.
News flash: If you didn't open up the preferences and look for whatever checkbox that Kazaa (or whatever client you have) might have that says "Enable file sharing" and figure that if it's checked, you might be, oh, I don't know, sharing files
I personally check preferences to see what I can tweak as one of the first things I do after installing a new application. So I assume that it's controllable. And I bet that it's defaulted to on, precisely because most people are too lazy to check their preferences, so if it defaulted to off, there would be no network.
Sorry for the rant -- it just amazes me how dumb people seem to be. I guess it's a prerequisite for getting in the news these days.
... they sent it to you unrequested in the mail. By law it's yours.
:)
Then send them the photos.
"Disassemble THIS!"
I work at WUSM and I don't recall us getting our access cut off due to worms etc but I'm sure you remember the day our net access died (according to my email history, the 15th). I'm not sure what was up with that. Know anything?
:P
The lab I work in did get hit by Klez but the sysadmin for the department took the machine offline til I patched it up. (I'm still not sure why NAV quit working...) We have a pile of immune-to-almost-everything Macs (OS9 except for my Powerbook, which runs OSX), one Win2k machine (firewalled and virus-scanned like crazy automatically), and one NT4 box (which has no net access, I set 'deny *' rules in the TCP/IP settings on the NIC). The only reason we're still using NT4 is that it's a workstation for a microscope and to update to Win2K would require updating/replacing the weird proprietary 1394 card the microscope vendor installs.
At home I have an XP Corporate box with a hardware firewall/router (really, a Netgear MR314), an automatically updated virus scanner, and a software firewall. If it weren't for games and apps like X-Plane I'd have wiped it ages ago and switched to Linux...
I still do have to put up with the PI occasionally asking "What's this piffy file thingy?" Me: *yawn* "It's a windows virus. Just delete it." "Oh... You're sure it's not going to infect me?" "Yes, I'm sure."
Guess who makes the most money out of the two of us?
Hypothetical situation: What if I were a student there (I'm not)?
I run Mozilla. I hate IE and would be happy if it'd die a horrible flaming death.
I do not allow ActiveX to execute anything except flash on sites that I *want* to see flash on.
How are you going to get me the patch, then?
It is. But it could also be made into living space. Skylab, after all, was nothing more than a converted S-IVB stage (designed to send Apollo spacecraft toward the moon as well as provide the final boost into Earth parking orbit) and the living space was placed in the fuel tank.
The Apollo Telescope Mount and forward part of the station, which contained docking ports, an airlock (modified from a Gemini capsule hatch), and other research instruments) was placed in the space where the Lunar Module once sat.
It worked well til NASA took too long to get off its butt and finish the space shuttle, and fell into the atmosphere in 1979. Parts of it landed in Australia.
Don't they have to use law enforcement (the courts) to bring a case? Would the court not have the power to throw out evidence that wasn't gathered correctly? I hear of this happening all the time -- which is why there are strict procedures covering the handling of evidence. It has to be collected within strict rules (e.g. to search a home a warrant is needed) and then it has to be kept "clean". If it's tainted, the case can be thrown out.
I don't see why everyone's so quick to dismiss the claims. Well, the RIAA is obviously biased, but third parties should technically be not so biased.
I have yet to see any, and I'm not sure how hopeful to be. I don't need the extra speed too badly at home but at work it would have been nice. Alas, no dice... yet.
g is pretty easy to make backward compatible because it's on the same frequency. a is not. But you still see a fair number of tri-mode routers out there.
But it won't be backwards compatible, so that way you'll have to buy a whole new laptop. Almost guaranteed. I thought the 802.11g equipment would be retrofittable because the antennas were the same. Nope! New form factor! Either put up with an ugly dongle that ruins the point of having a laptop, or pay us $3000 for a new one.
Sheesh.
If you're referring to the shuttle's external tank, this has been suggested in the past. The ET already makes it most of the way to orbit on its own (it burns up and is the only component that is not reused.) It wouldn't be all that hard to add a kick motor to the underside of the tank. However, the proposals never went anywhere.
X-Chat Aqua. http://xchataqua.sourceforge.net
Damnit, you beat me to it!
Summary of the anti-RIAA/MPAA version, in plain-English for non-B5 fans:
---
When faced with subpoenas and threats to shut down and fall in line ("we're a police state, we can do whatever the hell we want, so start bending over, oh, and we aren't giving you any KY") the response was "Oh yeah!?!?! We're not going to do what you tell us, because you SUCK, so do your stupid rules, no two-week notice, we are OUT!"
When the feds came after them, the response was "We have bigger friends than you. Look, here they come now..." Their friends jump in from out of nowhere: "We have bigger guns -- errrrr, lawyers -- than you. The only one of you who has ever survived is behind us [Grokster waves and looks smug]. You're in front of our legal guns. Go away, you MPAA commie bastards!"
The feds then run like hell because they know they're about to get lawyered and judged out of existence if they stick around. Much cheering ensues.
The feds keep creating more rules and more excuses, and keep piling more and more guns -- er, lawyers -- onto the case, and keep sending veiled threats. So the station merely goes out and talks to all its friends and gets them to chase off any bad guys -- er, lawyers -- who might show up.
This goes on for a while, until finally the bad guys learn their lesson and get their butts kicked, but not after trying, and failing, to steal technology from some even older bad guys (um, who would that be in this spoof? uhhhh...) who drive around in weird black crablike things. Hmmm. Must be SUV drivers... yeah, that's it!
The guy responsible for passing all the bad laws finally loses and kills himself like any good villain, after one last rant about "new-kew-lar" stuff.. Last attempt to make a horrible mess is foiled. Much cheering ensues.
The End.
---
I'm two DVDs away from running out of season-3 episodes. I can't find the fourth season up for preorder on amazon yet. Arrrrrrgggh! I want my B5!!!