Actually a 'partial retraction' from Eric Rumsey who does not appear to be affiliated with MedWeb, rather the University of Iowa, Hardin Library for the Health Sciences.
>but they still question why Yahoo is on the rise)
"...Google reportedly says that they are now crawling *all* of Yahoo! as part of their agreement...If Google is changing the way they're treating Yahoo! in rankings, they should say something about it. "
Sounds like a 'save-face' whine if I ever heard one. Why should anyone expect Google to announce something like this? "We just made a deal with Yahoo! to be their search engine. We will be increasing our coverage of Yahoo! sites from around 20% to 100%". Duh! If you were Yahoo! and you were starting to use Google, wouldn't you want to make sure 100% of your own content will be indexed? Sheesh!
Just curious, why was he obligated to state the value as $300? Insurance?
Wouldn't he have been better off to declare the contents as having a value of $1? The fact that the shipping is included in the $100 limit sucks. Maybe this is because of the risk of having something like this ripped off. I know it is probably a stereotype, but maybe the reputation for russian officials being corrupt is well deserved, hence UPS's reluctance to ship anything of any value to anywhere other than the handfull of cities where they probably have to pay someone off to make sure packages go through customs intact. Even then, they aren't willing to take a risk on anything over $10,000.
This sucks, but what can you do? Probably only way to get it there is to take it yourself, and carry-on at that. Not really cost-effective, though unless you are planning to visit anyway.
Well, I wasn't "bashing" Microsoft because of M-Net.
The poster made an anology on insecure servers to crappy doorlocks. I just took it to an off-topic tangent that you probably can't sue Stanley corporation for lock failures any more than you could sue Microsoft for server security failures.
>That would mean hundreds of millions of criminals!
Well of course! How else are these law-enforcement political types going to throw a big enough scare into the legislature to get the nice, fat budget appropriation they need next year to beef up their 'cyber-crime prevention office'?
>you, the lock seller, would be sued for any damage the kid did to my house.
Ah, but you implicity agreed to the End User Locksmith Agreement when you opened the shrink-wrapped package for the Micro-lock Deadbolt 2000 product you used and are now claiming to be defective.
The EULA clearly states that Deadbolt 2000 is not guaranteed to be fit for any particular purpose and that Micro-lock cannot be held liable for damages resulting from improper installation or or use of the product. Deabbolt 2000 uses Java technology, and as such should not be used in any critical application such as medical devices, manufacturer processing control or securing your front door.
(sorry, I'm bored at work. Moderators, please help me bleed off excess karma!)
Yeah, ok -- lost the thread of the discussion there. Sorry if I said you didn't know what you were talking about out of hand.
That whole homepage discussion is off-base. I've seen IE pop up the microsoft-update location in the status bar on occasion when first launching the browser, don't think it actually does that for each and every load of your homepage. And as you say, if you had no outside net access at all, it certainly wouldn't work at all.
Gotta read the parent posts a little more closely, i guess.:/
Well, I like google, though I don't go directly to their page to start my search anymore. I have a page on the local server with just the simple form to launch a google query. Not a real big deal, but I find I just keep a browser window open to that page so I can go do a search without having to stop what I'm doing, open a browser window, go to a bookmark, etc.
Actually, I pretty much just copied the form from the slashbox and modified it a little:
Just put that code into a local page and you can start a search without going to google's start page. I'm sure you could do the same with a bunch of other search sites, just found it was convenient to do this with google since I use them pretty much exclusively now.
No, of course it wouldn't. Who said it would? This is about default bookmarks in IE, isn't it? If you have no public internet access, this really isn't an issue anyway, is it? If you had NO internet connection, what are you doing clicking the 'free hotmail' bookmark anyway?
>wrong, thank's for playing. here"s a little clue for you...
Boy that's pretty rude and arrogant coming from someone who obviously has no idea what he's talking about.
Redirection is not proxying. Microsoft is not retreiving your fscking homepage through your firewall to serve it to you from their server back through your firewall. You can go to a page on the net with a redirection in the meta tag to send you straight back to any address you can reach from your own machine:
will simply tell your browser to go to the address in the tag. The server on which the page resides does not have to have access to the address in order to make your browser pop there.
Right, but I thought the original comment was about manned launch failures.
Anyway, this has strayed far beyond the original topic which was if one would be willing to risk their life for a TV show given the rate of failure of Russian manned launches, someone pointed out there were US failures as well. Aside from the Challenger, which was the mother of all manned launch failures, I can't find any others. I concede the point that the US space program's record on failure is not spotless, but I think the point that Russia's record would make the trip more risky is overblown - they haven't killed anybody since before challenger.
"a small number of the more than 4.7 million items on our site may be mispriced. "
Now, I don't buy this that Amazon just screwed up on some small number of items having read the DVD message board someone linked to in the original story's comments. Lots of people were able to reproduce this 'error' by using different browsers or wipeing cache and cookies or whatnot.
Sounds like they may have had some back-end bugs that cropped up on some of their items and the DVD crowd narrowed it down. The initial e-mail someone claimed to have gotten from Amazon saying something to the effect that they play around with prices sounded really fishy. Why would they ever put that in writing. Was this e-mail ever posted anywhere online? Does anyone have a link?
Which Apollo mission had a failed manned launch? I know about the capsule fire during ground testing that killed 3 astronauts and Apollo 13's CM explosion, but I don't recall any any launch failures.
Reminds me of that Discovery Channel series 'Wings'; the one episode they were talking about the Russian 'Air Force' (really, there are three I think) where they were selling SU-27 rides to anyone with $20,000 and a signed release form.
Showed a guy all smiles and jumping up and down handing them the cash, signing any form they put in front of him and going through a 'training' which was basically how to put on the flight suit and how to pull the ejection handle.
Once they had the cash and release in hand, they were anything but 'gentle'. This guy got his money's worth on high-g turns, negative-g dives and gut-wrenching rolls. They helped him out of the plane looking about as pale as a gallon of milk. The Russians were chuckling and winking at each other.
'boy, I thought I knew what flying was about after playing combat flight simulators on my computer at home. this was _nothing_ like that!'
This had been around for a while. Here's a 1997 CNN article about a technology by Art Guard that shows the 'scanner'. Saying that the ink contains 'DNA' is an over-simplification of the process. The ink contains a unique 'marker' that is derived from a short sequence of someone's DNA. The scanner is programmed to detect this 'marker'.
Joe Barbera was using this tech to 'protect' his autographed animation cels. Saw this on the discovery channel ages ago.
If this is the same thing Hanna/Barbera were using in the ink to sign merchandise, this is not really 'DNA'.
From what I recall, the DNA sample taken from the subject isn't just dumped into the ink, there is some goofy process where some small sequence is used to generate a 'marker' that the ink carries that is can be detected with a scanner built by the same company.
Thought I remembered seeing this on that Australian show 'Next Step' on the Discovery Channel a while back.
Man, whatever you're smokin' today must be primo, eh?
You know, you have a point though. Before the advent of mass-produced internal combustion engines, there wasn't nearly as much plant life on the planet.:-p
>I tried to use the junkbuster proxy behind IE, and half the time, IE went directly to the site in question, bypassing junkbuster
How's that again? That doesn't seem likely. I've used IJB for a while as my proxy on my home firewall, IE doesn't have any other way out of my home LAN (masq set up for lots of things,:80 not one of them) so if IE were to ignore the connection settings (half the time?) I wouldn't be able to surf (the times when I use IE5).
I do agree with the sentiment, 'when in doubt, diable'.
So... how can Sega have given stock options when there company is not traded publicly? I admit, I don't know much about this part, but my assumption was that options don't do you any good unless the stock trades on the open market where the price would go up making options exercisable at a lower price lucrative. Like I said, this is crapola.
>Unfortunately, the same is true of LSD and automatic weapons.
No, I don't think you understood what I was trying to say.
I mean, given enough determination and money anyone can get just about anything in this country. I think attempting to draw a parallel between violent video games and illegal drugs and weapons is stretching it a bit.
I think handing $40 to a 17-tr old and having them get you a copy of Quake from K-mart is a totally different thing than scoring an AK-47.
Having a violent video game in your posession doesn't have the same potential for harm as taking a hallucinogenic or wielding an automatic weapon. What is your point?
This annoys the crap out of me. If this were a government mandate or something, this comment might just make sense.
>They take away violent video and computer games which surely, and of course completely shatter the poor childrens minds
Um, this is a company doing this on it's own perogative. I didn't see anywhere where this was anything but voluntary. Of course, things like the content rating systems that are being voluntarily adopted are presumably intended to head off government regulation.
I don't like all the things our government does and I'm not defending it. Just that this pissed-of venting is assuming that this is some federal regulatio or something when it's not.
Slashdot Mirror
>a partial retraction from MedWebPlus:
Actually a 'partial retraction' from Eric Rumsey who does not appear to be affiliated with MedWeb, rather the University of Iowa, Hardin Library for the Health Sciences.
>but they still question why Yahoo is on the rise)
"...Google reportedly says that they are now crawling *all* of Yahoo! as part of their agreement...If Google is changing the way they're treating Yahoo! in rankings, they should say something about it. "
Sounds like a 'save-face' whine if I ever heard one. Why should anyone expect Google to announce something like this? "We just made a deal with Yahoo! to be their search engine. We will be increasing our coverage of Yahoo! sites from around 20% to 100%". Duh! If you were Yahoo! and you were starting to use Google, wouldn't you want to make sure 100% of your own content will be indexed? Sheesh!
Just curious, why was he obligated to state the value as $300? Insurance?
Wouldn't he have been better off to declare the contents as having a value of $1? The fact that the shipping is included in the $100 limit sucks. Maybe this is because of the risk of having something like this ripped off. I know it is probably a stereotype, but maybe the reputation for russian officials being corrupt is well deserved, hence UPS's reluctance to ship anything of any value to anywhere other than the handfull of cities where they probably have to pay someone off to make sure packages go through customs intact. Even then, they aren't willing to take a risk on anything over $10,000.
This sucks, but what can you do? Probably only way to get it there is to take it yourself, and carry-on at that. Not really cost-effective, though unless you are planning to visit anyway.
Well, I wasn't "bashing" Microsoft because of M-Net.
The poster made an anology on insecure servers to crappy doorlocks. I just took it to an off-topic tangent that you probably can't sue Stanley corporation for lock failures any more than you could sue Microsoft for server security failures.
Sorry if that offended you.
>That would mean hundreds of millions of criminals!
Well of course! How else are these law-enforcement political types going to throw a big enough scare into the legislature to get the nice, fat budget appropriation they need next year to beef up their 'cyber-crime prevention office'?
>you, the lock seller, would be sued for any damage the kid did to my house.
Ah, but you implicity agreed to the End User Locksmith Agreement when you opened the shrink-wrapped package for the Micro-lock Deadbolt 2000 product you used and are now claiming to be defective.
The EULA clearly states that Deadbolt 2000 is not guaranteed to be fit for any particular purpose and that Micro-lock cannot be held liable for damages resulting from improper installation or or use of the product. Deabbolt 2000 uses Java technology, and as such should not be used in any critical application such as medical devices, manufacturer processing control or securing your front door.
(sorry, I'm bored at work. Moderators, please help me bleed off excess karma!)
Yeah, ok -- lost the thread of the discussion there. Sorry if I said you didn't know what you were talking about out of hand.
:/
That whole homepage discussion is off-base. I've seen IE pop up the microsoft-update location in the status bar on occasion when first launching the browser, don't think it actually does that for each and every load of your homepage. And as you say, if you had no outside net access at all, it certainly wouldn't work at all.
Gotta read the parent posts a little more closely, i guess.
Cool! Gonna try that right now, thanks!
Well, I like google, though I don't go directly to their page to start my search anymore. I have a page on the local server with just the simple form to launch a google query. Not a real big deal, but I find I just keep a browser window open to that page so I can go do a search without having to stop what I'm doing, open a browser window, go to a bookmark, etc.
Actually, I pretty much just copied the form from the slashbox and modified it a little:
<FORM name=f method=GET action="http://www.google.com/search">
<INPUT type=text name=q value="" size=20><br>
<INPUT type=submit name=btnG value="Google Search">
<INPUT type=submit name=btnI value="I'm Feeling Lucky"><BR>
<select name=num><option value=10 selected>10 results
<option value=30>30 results
<option value=100>100 results</select>
</FORM>
Just put that code into a local page and you can start a search without going to google's start page. I'm sure you could do the same with a bunch of other search sites, just found it was convenient to do this with google since I use them pretty much exclusively now.
No, of course it wouldn't. Who said it would? This is about default bookmarks in IE, isn't it? If you have no public internet access, this really isn't an issue anyway, is it? If you had NO internet connection, what are you doing clicking the 'free hotmail' bookmark anyway?
& ar=hotmail
http://www.microsoft.com/isapi/redir.dll?prd=ie
>wrong, thank's for playing. here"s a little clue for you...
- homepage.html">
Boy that's pretty rude and arrogant coming from someone who obviously has no idea what he's talking about.
Redirection is not proxying. Microsoft is not retreiving your fscking homepage through your firewall to serve it to you from their server back through your firewall. You can go to a page on the net with a redirection in the meta tag to send you straight back to any address you can reach from your own machine:
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Refresh" CONTENT="0;URL=http://127.0.0.1/my-self-important
will simply tell your browser to go to the address in the tag. The server on which the page resides does not have to have access to the address in order to make your browser pop there.
Anyway, this has strayed far beyond the original topic which was if one would be willing to risk their life for a TV show given the rate of failure of Russian manned launches, someone pointed out there were US failures as well. Aside from the Challenger, which was the mother of all manned launch failures, I can't find any others. I concede the point that the US space program's record on failure is not spotless, but I think the point that Russia's record would make the trip more risky is overblown - they haven't killed anybody since before challenger.
The horse is now oficially dead :-)
+3 insightful? Please.
"a small number of the more than 4.7 million items on our site may be mispriced. "
Now, I don't buy this that Amazon just screwed up on some small number of items having read the DVD message board someone linked to in the original story's comments. Lots of people were able to reproduce this 'error' by using different browsers or wipeing cache and cookies or whatnot.
Sounds like they may have had some back-end bugs that cropped up on some of their items and the DVD crowd narrowed it down. The initial e-mail someone claimed to have gotten from Amazon saying something to the effect that they play around with prices sounded really fishy. Why would they ever put that in writing. Was this e-mail ever posted anywhere online? Does anyone have a link?
Apollo 12 landed on the moon 11/19/1969 and returned safely to Earth with Conrad, Gordon and Bean
Apollo-12 mission summary
Called sarcasm, maybe you've heard of it?
Which Apollo mission had a failed manned launch? I know about the capsule fire during ground testing that killed 3 astronauts and Apollo 13's CM explosion, but I don't recall any any launch failures.
Reminds me of that Discovery Channel series 'Wings'; the one episode they were talking about the Russian 'Air Force' (really, there are three I think) where they were selling SU-27 rides to anyone with $20,000 and a signed release form.
Showed a guy all smiles and jumping up and down handing them the cash, signing any form they put in front of him and going through a 'training' which was basically how to put on the flight suit and how to pull the ejection handle.
Once they had the cash and release in hand, they were anything but 'gentle'. This guy got his money's worth on high-g turns, negative-g dives and gut-wrenching rolls. They helped him out of the plane looking about as pale as a gallon of milk. The Russians were chuckling and winking at each other.
'boy, I thought I knew what flying was about after playing combat flight simulators on my computer at home. this was _nothing_ like that!'
This had been around for a while. Here's a 1997 CNN article about a technology by Art Guard that shows the 'scanner'. Saying that the ink contains 'DNA' is an over-simplification of the process. The ink contains a unique 'marker' that is derived from a short sequence of someone's DNA. The scanner is programmed to detect this 'marker'.
Joe Barbera was using this tech to 'protect' his autographed animation cels. Saw this on the discovery channel ages ago.
If this is the same thing Hanna/Barbera were using in the ink to sign merchandise, this is not really 'DNA'.
From what I recall, the DNA sample taken from the subject isn't just dumped into the ink, there is some goofy process where some small sequence is used to generate a 'marker' that the ink carries that is can be detected with a scanner built by the same company.
Thought I remembered seeing this on that Australian show 'Next Step' on the Discovery Channel a while back.
>I saw no mention that the athlete was competing in the Olympics.
:-)
True, now that I think of it 'wanking' isn't an official Olympic sport yet, is it?
>Think about it.
:-p
Man, whatever you're smokin' today must be primo, eh?
You know, you have a point though. Before the advent of mass-produced internal combustion engines, there wasn't nearly as much plant life on the planet.
This has apparently already been in use for years on all TDK VHS cassettes wrappers. :-)
>I tried to use the junkbuster proxy behind IE, and half the time, IE went directly to the site in question, bypassing junkbuster
:80 not one of them) so if IE were to ignore the connection settings (half the time?) I wouldn't be able to surf (the times when I use IE5).
How's that again? That doesn't seem likely. I've used IJB for a while as my proxy on my home firewall, IE doesn't have any other way out of my home LAN (masq set up for lots of things,
I do agree with the sentiment, 'when in doubt, diable'.
So... how can Sega have given stock options when there company is not traded publicly? I admit, I don't know much about this part, but my assumption was that options don't do you any good unless the stock trades on the open market where the price would go up making options exercisable at a lower price lucrative. Like I said, this is crapola.
>Unfortunately, the same is true of LSD and automatic weapons.
No, I don't think you understood what I was trying to say.
I mean, given enough determination and money anyone can get just about anything in this country. I think attempting to draw a parallel between violent video games and illegal drugs and weapons is stretching it a bit.
I think handing $40 to a 17-tr old and having them get you a copy of Quake from K-mart is a totally different thing than scoring an AK-47.
Having a violent video game in your posession doesn't have the same potential for harm as taking a hallucinogenic or wielding an automatic weapon. What is your point?
>I love our government.
This annoys the crap out of me. If this were a government mandate or something, this comment might just make sense.
>They take away violent video and computer games which surely, and of course completely shatter the poor childrens minds
Um, this is a company doing this on it's own perogative. I didn't see anywhere where this was anything but voluntary. Of course, things like the content rating systems that are being voluntarily adopted are presumably intended to head off government regulation.
I don't like all the things our government does and I'm not defending it. Just that this pissed-of venting is assuming that this is some federal regulatio or something when it's not.