At least with peer-reviewed journals, that does not hold true. The author usually has to actually pay to have their submissions printed in such publications.
In ever peer-reviewed journal I've ever published in, page charges are always optional. Along with the copyright form that gives the journal permission to reproduce the author's work, the page charge form allows the author to decline -- no questions asked -- the page charge fee.
If I recall correctly, Comcast's primary method of blacklist prevention is that they don't allow outbound port 25 access from end-user machines, everyone has to go through their SMTP server; Comcast doesn't get blacklisted because machines on their network can't spam.
Spamhaus has Comcast listed as the #6 source of of spam in the world. http://www.spamhaus.org/statistics.lasso
It's not like Comcast has a lily-white reputation.
Ugh. The article gets almost everything mostly wrong.
SPEWS doesn't list "email addresses." It lists IP addresses for spam-friendly ISPs. (Although the article says "net addresses," not "email addresses," as in the Slashdot summary.
Telewest admits that a huge virus infection meant they were a large source of spam. The SPEWS listing is allowing the rest of the world to quarantine them until they can clean up their act.
Telewest was a big source of spam. They were blacklisted. That's what blacklists do. That's why we use them. Don't like it? Don't use SPEWS.
Fact 1. The universe is extremely intricate and complicated
The biggest problem I have with your Fact 1 is that complexity is entirely subjective. What defines "complex?" How do we determine if one system is more or less complex than another? How do we quantify that difference?
The fact is that the universe isn't complex. It's quite simple. There's only a handful of different forces involved. An electron understands (if you'll pardon the anthropomorphism) exactly what it's supposed to do when it experiences an electric field, and it always does it.
The problem is that we monkey-brained humans have difficulty understanding the universe and these forces, so we have to come up with linguistic and cognitive structures like math and calculus and quantum mechanics to describe the fundamental underpinnings of the universe.
We're well-adapted to hunting, gathering, fighting, and reproducing. We're not well-adapted to predicting the motions of stars and modeling radioactive decay. Therefore, we have difficulty understanding these things, and they become "complex."
So doesn't that mean the rover was massively over-engineered?
Or, maybe, it was designed to meet it's 90-day lifetime with 99.9% reliability. That will tail off as it gets older. It's not like they would design it to survive a 90-day mission, with it exploding into fiery chunks on day 91.
When the Phelps clan goes to some poor guy's funeral and loudly pickets in front of his family, holding signs and chanting "God Hates Fags," that's hate.
When the same people want to put up a monument in a public park celebrating the date "Matthew Shepard entered Hell," that's hate.
When parents kick their teenage children out of their home, as happened to more than one friend of mine, that's hate.
When Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson blame gays (and others) for 9/11, that's hate.
When Sen. Rick Santorum says that a decades-long, committed, monogamous relationship between two men is morally equivalent to a guy screwing his dog, that's hate.
When the Texas GOP Platform says, "We support the recriminalization of sodomy," well, whether that's hate is debatable, but it's certainly an inappropriate use of the criminal justice system.
No one hates Christians, as you accuse. No one is accusing Christianity of being evil, as you accuse. Sure, there's lots of resentment in the gay community toward conservative groups, largely due to the horrible things they've said and done.
Even in Jesus's time homosexuality (insofar as much as the term applies) was common, or at least not entirely unusual. Jesus healed what was most likely the gay lover of a Roman soldier, and said nothing about it. The evidence that David and Johnathan were lovers is also quite compelling.
Much of the Biblical proscriptions against homosexuality are about ritual purity and when the Jewish community "sought to separate itself from neighbouring peoples to establish a Jewish distinctiveness." [1]
They are not intended as a moral teaching; the Hebrew words for the two are different.
Look, if you want to preach in your Church and teach your (maybe even your gay) kids that being gay, or Jewish, or divorced or whatever is evil, and will get you an eternity of unendurable torment in the fires of Hell, all thanks to God's infinite love, fine. That's your right. But don't expect the rest of us to stand by and watch while conservative Christians try to legislate their religious beliefs.
Unfortunately the reasonable middle isn't the ones out picketing the funerals of gay people. (Fred Phelps) They're not the one's on TV saying that a gay couple adopting a kid is "violence against the child." (The late Pope) They're not the ones that are saying gay people should be put in jail. (2004 Texas GOP platform)
The reasonable middle is fairly silent on these issues, and so it is the whackjob-fringe groups that get all the press and the air time.
It's not correct to say traditional publishers don't ask for money to publish. Some journals require you to pay fee(see in page charges heading). See this link for a debate on the open journals published in Nature
While it's true that publishers charge page fees, every journal I've ever published in will waive them if you are not able or even willing to pay. (Color figures are an exception, but there is significant additional technical difficulty there.) Many researchers are short on funds, and journals realize this.
Nature is a bit of an exception, I think, and they are also unusual in that they accept advertising. Very, very few real scientific journals, at least in my field, accept advertising. If they do, they are usually industry trade rags.
Good points were raised by the parent, but let's go a step further. An ISP has "common carrier" status because they carry all traffic, regardless of who it is for, where it is going, or what the traffic is. The minute they stop doing this, they are no longer common carriers and can be sued for facilitating various copyright infringements.
ISPs are not common carriers. Personally, I think they should have common carrier protection, since all they do is shuttle data back and forth, analagous to a telephone company. They do not, however, currently have that legal standing. The FCC differentiates between communications and data transmissions. ISPs are considered enhanced service providers.
Better yet, why don't ISPs disconnect them until they can demonstrate they've been cleaned up?
Because it is not in the ISP's best (i.e. financial) interests to do so. Finding these machines, teaching users how to clean them up, and then reactivating their access would require a great deal of manpower and money. Since not doing it is consequence-free, there is no incentive to do it. It's like dealing with hazardous waste; it's difficult and expensive. Without some outside force compelling companies to dispose of it appropriately, they would deal with it the cheapest and easiest way possible. That is, dumping it on the rest of us, like these ISPs do.
I'm not sure what the rules and definitions are for food labeling, but all trans fats are unsaturated, and so they may be included in the "unsaturated fat" part of the label.
Yes, the Martican atmosphere is 95% CO2, but it's only at 0.007 atm.
Damnit, why doesn't the <sub> tag work.
Because it's not a tag that Slashdot allows.
Allowed HTML: <B> <I> <P> <A> <LI> <OL> <UL> <EM> <BR> <TT> <STRONG> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV> <ECODE> <DL> <DT> <DD> <CITE> (Use "ECODE" instead of "PRE" or "CODE".)
The problem with liquid mercury is that even a quick dip fills up your skin pours and this your skin can't breath. Death quickly follows this.
Um, no. Your skin does not need to breathe. Only insects get oxygen through their skin. (For lack of a better term.) If this were true, you'd die any time you went swimming.
I think a much better term is "undifferentiated zygote."
Very, very few abortions happen when a fetus is viable. I think in many states that's flat out illegal. And saying that terminating a pregnancy before there is a heartbeat, let alone any sort of brainwave activiy, is morally equivalent to killing an infant is ridiculous.
The domains sending the email exist, but the ones advertised in the email do not. Because SpamCop (et. al) punish not only the sending IP block, but also the advertised host/IP block, spammers are advertising sites that won't exist for a few hours, tricking SpamCop (et al) into reporting on domains that don't exist and therefore cannot be penalized.
Not quite. By "SpamCop" I assume you're talking about spamcop.net. SpamCop sends reports to the originating IP. It will also send reports to hosts of URLs contained in the body of the spam, but not it they do not resolve to an IP address, IIRC. Therefore, no valid DNS = no SpamCop report.
Actually, there are quite a few models of domestic cars (mainly minivans) out durring the late 80s and early 90s that use only about five different key cuts and remote (door open) codes.
I have a 92 Saturn SL, and a former neighbor had a similar model. Mine was dark blue, his was green, and in the night he once unlocked my car by accident. He was surprised, since his car didn't have an alarm, and mine did.
As we later discovered, his key would not start my ignition, however.
Well, an ISP which allowed you to choose to ban email from China, Brazil, Argentina and anyplace else you don't have friends or family, would probably find that it could make a few extra bucks from the service. Or, it could be a setting in the extra-cost spam filter that most ISPs already seem to offer.
I've been telling everyone I know to use SpamPal. (Windows, client-side, blah, blah blah) It lets you block email originating from all those countries, and more. And with the URLBody plugin, you can block mail containing URLs hosted in those countries, too.
Is there any reason not to ban all mail originating from (or relayed through) addresses in China? I supose that big universities have a lot of students who use email to keep in touch with family in China, but most ISPs could probably do this without any harm to their customers.
The problem is that the spam email usually isn't sent from China. It originates from Brazil, or Argentina, or one of the many, many zombie PCs out there. China is just willing to host the spammer's website.
This is why I've been saying that the (current, temporary) solution to spam is to find any fiber optic line that connects China to the rest of the world and go at it with an axe. When they behave like responsible adults, they can have another one.
...the government shall pass no law preventing me from praying to whatever I want, wherever I want. That means I should be able to pray in schools, pray in libraries
So you think you should be allowed to kneel and start praying in the middle of a busy intersection? No one is stopping you from praying in schools or libraries, quietly and without disrupting other people. If, however, you want to stand on a chair in the middle of the library, and start preaching, I'll bet you'll be asked to leave.
where noone is allowed to practice their religions on public property because someone might be offended
Nonesense. No one is saying that a DMV worker isn't allowed to practice his or her religion. What's not appropriate is for that same DMV worker to refuse to renew your drivers license unless you praise Jesus.
And, yes, many of our Founding Fathers were religious. Whether or not they were Christian is something of a matter of historical debate. But what is clear is that they felt the government should not institute a religion, or force one upon it's people. It is also clear that they felt that the country the formed was not just for Christians (as most Americans were then and now are), but open and welcoming to everyone. They realized that it is possible to have one's own faith, but feel that it is not appropriate to try to impose that faith on everyone else.
Just type in the group's name. That's what I usually do.
Yes, I'll admit that will work. But lots of times I can't remember the exact newsgroup name. (Is it rec.games.nethack or rec.games.roguelike.nethack?)
The problem seems to me that Usenet is a very well-structured set of data, and Google is very good at indexing and searching unstructured data (i.e. the Web). So applying the same principles to GG as to Google's Web search won't work the same way. It's like walking into a bookstore, and finding all the books sorted on the shelves by popularity, not author's name.
As I write this, I notice that whatever Google had done earlier, they have now undone.
One thing that's horrible, is trying to find a group in the new system. I was looking for news.admin.net-abuse.email. (Fortunately, I have it bookmarked.) After going to "news." from the top-level Google Groups page, I was taken to a category selection page that included things like "Arts & Entertainment" and even "Adult". There are no such groups under the Usenet news. heirarchy. And under those categories the individual groups are ordered in what's probably their Google PageRank order, not alphabetically, not by size, not by any obvious means.
The big change seems to be they are integrating the Usenet archive with their own Groups stuff, and the two really aren't the same.
Perhaps in 5 to 10 years, when Valve has determined that they won't be making any more money off HL2, they'll set up some sort of way to let you play the game. I don't know.
Why would Valve spend valuable man-hours (i.e. money) setting up such a system for a game that is no longer profitable to them? Maybe out of the goodness of their hearts, and the desire to seem receptive to the interest of their customers. But if they go bankrupt or get bought out (and we know that neither of those things would ever happen in the computer industry, let along the gaming software industry) these wouldn't apply.
Slashdot Mirror
In ever peer-reviewed journal I've ever published in, page charges are always optional. Along with the copyright form that gives the journal permission to reproduce the author's work, the page charge form allows the author to decline -- no questions asked -- the page charge fee.
Ugh. The article gets almost everything mostly wrong.
SPEWS doesn't list "email addresses." It lists IP addresses for spam-friendly ISPs. (Although the article says "net addresses," not "email addresses," as in the Slashdot summary.
Telewest admits that a huge virus infection meant they were a large source of spam. The SPEWS listing is allowing the rest of the world to quarantine them until they can clean up their act.
Telewest was a big source of spam. They were blacklisted. That's what blacklists do. That's why we use them. Don't like it? Don't use SPEWS.
The biggest problem I have with your Fact 1 is that complexity is entirely subjective. What defines "complex?" How do we determine if one system is more or less complex than another? How do we quantify that difference?
The fact is that the universe isn't complex. It's quite simple. There's only a handful of different forces involved. An electron understands (if you'll pardon the anthropomorphism) exactly what it's supposed to do when it experiences an electric field, and it always does it.
The problem is that we monkey-brained humans have difficulty understanding the universe and these forces, so we have to come up with linguistic and cognitive structures like math and calculus and quantum mechanics to describe the fundamental underpinnings of the universe.
We're well-adapted to hunting, gathering, fighting, and reproducing. We're not well-adapted to predicting the motions of stars and modeling radioactive decay. Therefore, we have difficulty understanding these things, and they become "complex."
Oh please, you don't know hate from hinola.
No one hates Christians, as you accuse. No one is accusing Christianity of being evil, as you accuse. Sure, there's lots of resentment in the gay community toward conservative groups, largely due to the horrible things they've said and done.
Even in Jesus's time homosexuality (insofar as much as the term applies) was common, or at least not entirely unusual. Jesus healed what was most likely the gay lover of a Roman soldier, and said nothing about it. The evidence that David and Johnathan were lovers is also quite compelling.
Much of the Biblical proscriptions against homosexuality are about ritual purity and when the Jewish community "sought to separate itself from neighbouring peoples to establish a Jewish distinctiveness." [1] They are not intended as a moral teaching; the Hebrew words for the two are different.
Look, if you want to preach in your Church and teach your (maybe even your gay) kids that being gay, or Jewish, or divorced or whatever is evil, and will get you an eternity of unendurable torment in the fires of Hell, all thanks to God's infinite love, fine. That's your right. But don't expect the rest of us to stand by and watch while conservative Christians try to legislate their religious beliefs.
Unfortunately the reasonable middle isn't the ones out picketing the funerals of gay people. (Fred Phelps) They're not the one's on TV saying that a gay couple adopting a kid is "violence against the child." (The late Pope) They're not the ones that are saying gay people should be put in jail. (2004 Texas GOP platform)
The reasonable middle is fairly silent on these issues, and so it is the whackjob-fringe groups that get all the press and the air time.
While it's true that publishers charge page fees, every journal I've ever published in will waive them if you are not able or even willing to pay. (Color figures are an exception, but there is significant additional technical difficulty there.) Many researchers are short on funds, and journals realize this.
Nature is a bit of an exception, I think, and they are also unusual in that they accept advertising. Very, very few real scientific journals, at least in my field, accept advertising. If they do, they are usually industry trade rags.
ISPs are not common carriers. Personally, I think they should have common carrier protection, since all they do is shuttle data back and forth, analagous to a telephone company. They do not, however, currently have that legal standing. The FCC differentiates between communications and data transmissions. ISPs are considered enhanced service providers.
http://www.merit.edu/mail.archives/nanog/2000-10/m sg00012.html M _Digest_Online/2490.html
http://massis.lcs.mit.edu/telecom-archives/TELECO
If you have an 11" penis and 36DDD breasts, spammers really need to start targeting their spam better.
Because it is not in the ISP's best (i.e. financial) interests to do so. Finding these machines, teaching users how to clean them up, and then reactivating their access would require a great deal of manpower and money. Since not doing it is consequence-free, there is no incentive to do it. It's like dealing with hazardous waste; it's difficult and expensive. Without some outside force compelling companies to dispose of it appropriately, they would deal with it the cheapest and easiest way possible. That is, dumping it on the rest of us, like these ISPs do.
I'm not sure what the rules and definitions are for food labeling, but all trans fats are unsaturated, and so they may be included in the "unsaturated fat" part of the label.
Um, no. Your skin does not need to breathe. Only insects get oxygen through their skin. (For lack of a better term.) If this were true, you'd die any time you went swimming.
Urban legends page: http://www.snopes.com/movies/films/goldfing.htm
I think a much better term is "undifferentiated zygote."
Very, very few abortions happen when a fetus is viable. I think in many states that's flat out illegal. And saying that terminating a pregnancy before there is a heartbeat, let alone any sort of brainwave activiy, is morally equivalent to killing an infant is ridiculous.
I have a 92 Saturn SL, and a former neighbor had a similar model. Mine was dark blue, his was green, and in the night he once unlocked my car by accident. He was surprised, since his car didn't have an alarm, and mine did.
As we later discovered, his key would not start my ignition, however.
I've been telling everyone I know to use SpamPal. (Windows, client-side, blah, blah blah) It lets you block email originating from all those countries, and more. And with the URLBody plugin, you can block mail containing URLs hosted in those countries, too.
The problem is that the spam email usually isn't sent from China. It originates from Brazil, or Argentina, or one of the many, many zombie PCs out there. China is just willing to host the spammer's website.
This is why I've been saying that the (current, temporary) solution to spam is to find any fiber optic line that connects China to the rest of the world and go at it with an axe. When they behave like responsible adults, they can have another one.
So you think you should be allowed to kneel and start praying in the middle of a busy intersection? No one is stopping you from praying in schools or libraries, quietly and without disrupting other people. If, however, you want to stand on a chair in the middle of the library, and start preaching, I'll bet you'll be asked to leave.
Nonesense. No one is saying that a DMV worker isn't allowed to practice his or her religion. What's not appropriate is for that same DMV worker to refuse to renew your drivers license unless you praise Jesus.And, yes, many of our Founding Fathers were religious. Whether or not they were Christian is something of a matter of historical debate. But what is clear is that they felt the government should not institute a religion, or force one upon it's people. It is also clear that they felt that the country the formed was not just for Christians (as most Americans were then and now are), but open and welcoming to everyone. They realized that it is possible to have one's own faith, but feel that it is not appropriate to try to impose that faith on everyone else.
The problem seems to me that Usenet is a very well-structured set of data, and Google is very good at indexing and searching unstructured data (i.e. the Web). So applying the same principles to GG as to Google's Web search won't work the same way. It's like walking into a bookstore, and finding all the books sorted on the shelves by popularity, not author's name.
As I write this, I notice that whatever Google had done earlier, they have now undone.
One thing that's horrible, is trying to find a group in the new system. I was looking for news.admin.net-abuse.email. (Fortunately, I have it bookmarked.) After going to "news." from the top-level Google Groups page, I was taken to a category selection page that included things like "Arts & Entertainment" and even "Adult". There are no such groups under the Usenet news. heirarchy. And under those categories the individual groups are ordered in what's probably their Google PageRank order, not alphabetically, not by size, not by any obvious means.
The big change seems to be they are integrating the Usenet archive with their own Groups stuff, and the two really aren't the same.
So we can assume you never saw Firefly?