Just put the newsletters' addresses on your white list. If your filter is smart enough, you can tell it to let them through - if not, just write a procmail recipe that allows them to skip the filter.
This would (and does) result in a speedup, but not the kind being talked about here. Instead of doing the same thing faster, as your suggestion would result, Monty is discussing doing things differently because there aren't two active copies of the data at all times. (No delay from copying and checking between the two.) RAM-only is at least twice as fast as ram-to-disk, even if your disks are as fast as the ram.
Re:X (and other Window systems) reduce productivit
on
Who Needs XFree86?
·
· Score: 1
You mean, "smelled of nasty, nasty strawberries." Cloying, sickening, artificial strawberries. Yes, at least I can remember the damned things and their horrible stench.
I suspect that most anyone would research this themselves before running some nine-volts in series and buying some siver wire, but this is as universally considered hookum as homeopathy, and in large enough doses, possibly dangerous.
Research it for yourself, though - don't listen to random idiots on the internet (me or Mike the AC) about medical advice.
Are you suggesting that perhaps AOL's legal team didn't understand how trademark law worked in electronic mediums until some lady's husband piped in with some ill-founded threats?
Continue this fight and you may win, but you'll never see another Terminator movie or Lord of the Rings or many other cool films because NO ONE WILL FINANCE THEM.
Sure they will - the same people that financed them this time - the people that went to see them.
The groups that confiscated 99.9% of the ticket sales just won't exist anymore, the movie will only cost me a buck to see, I can watch it in my own home without waiting for an artifical delay, and the pool of artists involved will make twice as much what they do now, on average.
Make believe you're the RIAA/MPAA. You call the police. You and the ISP go to court, present your unrefutable evidence, and possibly get a search warrant for the ISP's records, if you can prove your case. If not, it will be denied, and your case is over. Unless you convonce the judge to pass a gag order, the ISP may legally inform it's customer that a search warrant is being procured against them.
If you get your warrant, the the police serve it and retrieve the information.
Now, you all go to court a second time to get a warrant for the computer in question. (You cannot do this beforehand - search warrants may not be issued for John Does.) The government siezes the computer, looking for *the specific files* that are stated on the warrant, legally bound to ignore everything else. If the files are not found, the computer is returned, and the owner files suit against you. If any of those specific files are found, then, and only then do you have a case, and may continue.
You now must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the owner a) knowingly placed those pieces of media on thier computer, and b) do not have a "fair use" right to possess them. In other words, you must prove that the owner never purchased a legal copy of the song or movie in the past, whether they have lost the original disk/tape or not. Once you have proven this, you should be entitled to the fair value of the song - I.E., the cost to produce and distribute it prorated over all album sales from it's inception to perpetuity. In other words, a few thousands of a penny, and legal costs.
This is legal search and seizure, and a reasonable approximation of how proper civil proceedings are supposed to happen. The RIAA/MPAA are short curcuiting this process simply because they are set up to make money a different way. What they want, and what they are being allowed to do is unconstitutional in the United States. How did we all forget what due process is?
a) You're working hard to support a distribution channel that will never do anything but steal from you. The more you make for them, the more they will steal. Support the new distribution channel where you will (as Courtney Love says) make more form tips than you will from that they cast your way to keep you producing.
b) The U.S. Government is established to serve the will of the people, not the will of the corporation. It doesn't matter if you dislike this, or if you have a business plan that doesn't account for facts. The people want copyright laws reformed. The "Napster Generation" will one day vote, and they will eviscerate the Music and Movie industries both legally and economically, unless Msrs. Valenti and Rosen start to play ball with what the kids want. Anyone who intends to succeed in a publically supported career (like media and content creation or distribution) would be wise to listen to the will of the people.
Chandler_src_0.1.tar.gz includes the source to python, several modules including zodb, swig, wxpython, jabber-py, and thier own build system named hardhat.
Why do they feel the need to distribute those packages as part of the chandler cvs tree? Most of these modules have played well together in mixed versions for years.
Ok, you're either a troll, or you just don't pay attention. I'm going to point this out, because a number of people make the same dumb mistake every day. Re-read the story paragraph. See the part about "netbsd_fan writes"? You see, just about EVERY STORY ON SLASHDOT IS SUBMITTED BY A READER.
netbsd_fan's company has laid off win32 coders, not slashdot's parent company. Another issue: How would OSDN hiring win32 coders be arrogant or piss off readers?
As an employee (especially if you affect the bottom dollar - because you are pivotal, or the company is small) you have a different responsability to make the organization a success, including a higher need to stick your neck on the line.
I also feel this way when I get compensated in equity while consulting. I'm much pushier, because I have stake in the company's survival.
Once I see an issue, I make the attempt to correct the situation immediately.
If they are responsive, I help them draft a better plan - on the clock, of course. If they are unreceptive, I'll do anything they ask as long as it doesn't compromise my morals, doesn't open me up to legal or civil liability, and pays appropriately. It's thier money, thier time, and I'm doing the job for them.
One thing I don't do is play the "told you so" game after they ignore my advice and it blows up on them.
Reading a book on bombmaking Does not hurt anybody, and is protected by the United States Constitution.
researching, getting the materials Does not hurt anybody, and is not illegal, provided it does not involve stealing or the acquisition of controlled substances.
testing, etc.
May cause harm, but only to yourself, if tested properly. This is perfectly legal, but is (and probably should be) regulated.
Enticing a child to meet a moletser at the mall via a chat room is more "immediate" both in terms of time and, more importantly, direct causation.
First, meeting a kid isn't illegal. Buggering them is, and that's already against the law. If a child molester meets a kid at the mall to sell him a bike and doesnt do anything to him, then no crime was committed. If he touches, kidnaps, exposes himself, or injures the child, then that is illegal, and fully covered with existing laws, although they are too lenient for my tastes.
Second, this isn't an Internet problem. This is a parenting problem. Putting walls around kids just encourages them to climb them.
Education, affection, care and discipline are the ways to keep your kids from this harm, not policing everyone else. Teach your kids to swim, don't trust the fence to keep them out of the pool. Teach your kids to respect the power that drugs have, don't pray they never discover them. Raise strong, smart, respectful kids.
This is also the only way to prevent more molesters in the future - all whackos were someone's kids once - what are you doing to prevent them from being yours?
What about the guy who thinks it's cute to log on... who do they bust? The librarian.
Innocent until... what was it again?
Or what about the creep who... goes into the men's room to masturbate?
What about him? There are already public exposure laws. If he's not exposed, then I don't really care if he's jacking off in the bathroom - as long as he can keep it private, it's his thing, not mine.
What do you say to the 8-year-old who walks into the men's room and discovers him?
So what? It's not going to hurt him unless you make a big deal out of it. Sounds like a perfect time to give a lesson on decency, so he doesn't grow up to be a creep, too. Tell the kid it's wrong to do in public, toss the guy out, and be done with it.
Stop living in fear of litigation. If you need to, then get insurance, but stop hiding from whackjobs with lawyers, and start FIGHTING them.
Some of the provisions in PATRIOT I did not have sunset dates. Some of the provisions in PATRIOT II are specifically targetted at removing the sunset from clauses in PATRIOT I.
The ACLU has it's problems, but so does the PATRIOT act. Liberty requires constant vigilance, including reactionaries willing to dig and identify possible problems, conservatives willing to support the existing infrastructure, and lawyers willing to support either side in time of need - all doing their part, regardless of motivation.
Slashdot Mirror
Just put the newsletters' addresses on your white list. If your filter is smart enough, you can tell it to let them through - if not, just write a procmail recipe that allows them to skip the filter.
Around three months ago.
This would (and does) result in a speedup, but not the kind being talked about here. Instead of doing the same thing faster, as your suggestion would result, Monty is discussing doing things differently because there aren't two active copies of the data at all times. (No delay from copying and checking between the two.) RAM-only is at least twice as fast as ram-to-disk, even if your disks are as fast as the ram.
Now, that's just sick.
Of course they do - they love linux, and support it's widespread use in all ways, on all platforms.
You would too, if you had nothing worth selling, but thought you should recieve royalties from someone else's effort.
You mean, "smelled of nasty, nasty strawberries." Cloying, sickening, artificial strawberries. Yes, at least I can remember the damned things and their horrible stench.
I suspect that most anyone would research this themselves before running some nine-volts in series and buying some siver wire, but this is as universally considered hookum as homeopathy, and in large enough doses, possibly dangerous.
Research it for yourself, though - don't listen to random idiots on the internet (me or Mike the AC) about medical advice.
(Keep your Carl Sagan Baloney Detector in hand, because there's plenty to detect!)
Are you suggesting that perhaps AOL's legal team didn't understand how trademark law worked in electronic mediums until some lady's husband piped in with some ill-founded threats?
Continue this fight and you may win, but you'll never see another Terminator movie or Lord of the Rings or many other cool films because NO ONE WILL FINANCE THEM.
Sure they will - the same people that financed them this time - the people that went to see them.
The groups that confiscated 99.9% of the ticket sales just won't exist anymore, the movie will only cost me a buck to see, I can watch it in my own home without waiting for an artifical delay, and the pool of artists involved will make twice as much what they do now, on average.
Is it really that hard to support both opinions?
Make believe you're the RIAA/MPAA. You call the police. You and the ISP go to court, present your unrefutable evidence, and possibly get a search warrant for the ISP's records, if you can prove your case. If not, it will be denied, and your case is over. Unless you convonce the judge to pass a gag order, the ISP may legally inform it's customer that a search warrant is being procured against them.
If you get your warrant, the the police serve it and retrieve the information.
Now, you all go to court a second time to get a warrant for the computer in question. (You cannot do this beforehand - search warrants may not be issued for John Does.) The government siezes the computer, looking for *the specific files* that are stated on the warrant, legally bound to ignore everything else. If the files are not found, the computer is returned, and the owner files suit against you. If any of those specific files are found, then, and only then do you have a case, and may continue.
You now must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the owner a) knowingly placed those pieces of media on thier computer, and b) do not have a "fair use" right to possess them. In other words, you must prove that the owner never purchased a legal copy of the song or movie in the past, whether they have lost the original disk/tape or not. Once you have proven this, you should be entitled to the fair value of the song - I.E., the cost to produce and distribute it prorated over all album sales from it's inception to perpetuity. In other words, a few thousands of a penny, and legal costs.
This is legal search and seizure, and a reasonable approximation of how proper civil proceedings are supposed to happen. The RIAA/MPAA are short curcuiting this process simply because they are set up to make money a different way. What they want, and what they are being allowed to do is unconstitutional in the United States. How did we all forget what due process is?
None of this really matters.
a) You're working hard to support a distribution channel that will never do anything but steal from you. The more you make for them, the more they will steal. Support the new distribution channel where you will (as Courtney Love says) make more form tips than you will from that they cast your way to keep you producing.
b) The U.S. Government is established to serve the will of the people, not the will of the corporation. It doesn't matter if you dislike this, or if you have a business plan that doesn't account for facts. The people want copyright laws reformed. The "Napster Generation" will one day vote, and they will eviscerate the Music and Movie industries both legally and economically, unless Msrs. Valenti and Rosen start to play ball with what the kids want. Anyone who intends to succeed in a publically supported career (like media and content creation or distribution) would be wise to listen to the will of the people.
What? Do you think you know me, or are you insane?
Chandler_src_0.1.tar.gz includes the source to python, several modules including zodb, swig, wxpython, jabber-py, and thier own build system named hardhat.
Why do they feel the need to distribute those packages as part of the chandler cvs tree? Most of these modules have played well together in mixed versions for years.
What?
That's not free - it's just cheap.
Ok, you're either a troll, or you just don't pay attention. I'm going to point this out, because a number of people make the same dumb mistake every day. Re-read the story paragraph. See the part about "netbsd_fan writes"? You see, just about EVERY STORY ON SLASHDOT IS SUBMITTED BY A READER.
netbsd_fan's company has laid off win32 coders, not slashdot's parent company. Another issue: How would OSDN hiring win32 coders be arrogant or piss off readers?
That's a bit of a broad generalization isn't it?
No, it isnt. But thanks for trying.
Because your immediate path to success is tied to the company's success, the consultants is not.
The ultimate privacy concern is that I know you're going to have chicken nuggets and a hamburger for lunch!
And what is a "yogurt platter"?
As an employee (especially if you affect the bottom dollar - because you are pivotal, or the company is small) you have a different responsability to make the organization a success, including a higher need to stick your neck on the line.
I also feel this way when I get compensated in equity while consulting. I'm much pushier, because I have stake in the company's survival.
Once I see an issue, I make the attempt to correct the situation immediately.
If they are responsive, I help them draft a better plan - on the clock, of course. If they are unreceptive, I'll do anything they ask as long as it doesn't compromise my morals, doesn't open me up to legal or civil liability, and pays appropriately. It's thier money, thier time, and I'm doing the job for them.
One thing I don't do is play the "told you so" game after they ignore my advice and it blows up on them.
Reading a book on bombmaking
Does not hurt anybody, and is protected by the United States Constitution.
researching, getting the materials
Does not hurt anybody, and is not illegal, provided it does not involve stealing or the acquisition of controlled substances.
testing, etc.
May cause harm, but only to yourself, if tested properly. This is perfectly legal, but is (and probably should be) regulated.
Enticing a child to meet a moletser at the mall via a chat room is more "immediate" both in terms of time and, more importantly, direct causation.
First, meeting a kid isn't illegal. Buggering them is, and that's already against the law. If a child molester meets a kid at the mall to sell him a bike and doesnt do anything to him, then no crime was committed. If he touches, kidnaps, exposes himself, or injures the child, then that is illegal, and fully covered with existing laws, although they are too lenient for my tastes.
Second, this isn't an Internet problem. This is a parenting problem. Putting walls around kids just encourages them to climb them.
Education, affection, care and discipline are the ways to keep your kids from this harm, not policing everyone else. Teach your kids to swim, don't trust the fence to keep them out of the pool. Teach your kids to respect the power that drugs have, don't pray they never discover them. Raise strong, smart, respectful kids.
This is also the only way to prevent more molesters in the future - all whackos were someone's kids once - what are you doing to prevent them from being yours?
What about the guy who thinks it's cute to log on ... who do they bust? The librarian.
... what was it again?
... goes into the men's room to masturbate?
Innocent until
Or what about the creep who
What about him? There are already public exposure laws. If he's not exposed, then I don't really care if he's jacking off in the bathroom - as long as he can keep it private, it's his thing, not mine.
What do you say to the 8-year-old who walks into the men's room and discovers him?
So what? It's not going to hurt him unless you make a big deal out of it. Sounds like a perfect time to give a lesson on decency, so he doesn't grow up to be a creep, too. Tell the kid it's wrong to do in public, toss the guy out, and be done with it.
Stop living in fear of litigation. If you need to, then get insurance, but stop hiding from whackjobs with lawyers, and start FIGHTING them.
Americans have become such candyasses.
Some of the provisions in PATRIOT I did not have sunset dates. Some of the provisions in PATRIOT II are specifically targetted at removing the sunset from clauses in PATRIOT I.
The ACLU has it's problems, but so does the PATRIOT act. Liberty requires constant vigilance, including reactionaries willing to dig and identify possible problems, conservatives willing to support the existing infrastructure, and lawyers willing to support either side in time of need - all doing their part, regardless of motivation.