Anyone able to mirror these before the box went up in/. flavored flames?
Re:Why you should help
on
More WTC News
·
· Score: 2
The Blood Centers are saying that they're above capacity right now and are asking people to come back either next week or even later as reported here.
I saw a spokesperson on the Today Show this morning saying much the same thing. He mentioned that they need to stagger this supply chain.
All in all it's comforting to see people turn out in these kinds of numbers. I'm not saying that you shouldn't donate but that you may want to wait and do it in a few days like these people are asking.
I dunno about that. With the speed it's loading my money's on his webserver going first.
Sure hope he doesn't use that to code on because it looks like it's about to be a victim of the/. tactical strike.
But it amazed me that Alter, whenever they were talking about making a copy, kept saying "when it's posted on the Internet".
Pardon? Who said that if you make a single copy that you're going to post it?
Seems to me that that's one hell of an assumption to make. I see what he's trying to do though. If he stipulates that it's fair use to have a backup copy that doesn't get posted then... his argument is screwed.
Watch this film. Then go watch 2010. Same author. Entirely different feel. What's the big difference?
Kubrick. And why is that?
Let me state right off the bat that I am a huge Kubrick fan. I am a fan of every movie he did. Even The Shining and I despise Stephen King's novels. (Don't even think about it. I'm wearing asbestos.)
This film is a very good representation of Kubrick's style. What defines Kubrick's style is his decision to NOT include sound. If you look at this film and say, for instance, The Shining, pay attention to the key scenes, i.e. those scenes that are the turning points in the movie.
1. In 2001, when Dave Bowman is in the pod trying to get back in the ship and he realizes HAL has lost his damned mind.
2. In The Shining, when Jack is in the restroom with the waiter and realizes that he's been setup by some unknown force to fulfill some unknown purpose.
Listen carefully to those 2 scenes.
What do you hear?
NOT A GODDAMMED THING. No music. No background noise. No sound effects. Nothing at all.
What made Kubrick the genius was his NON-use of sound. He realized that it was silence that caused tension.
Well that and his angles of photography. You can always tell what is a Kubrick movie. To me that is the sign of a true genius.
technical people. And that's one of the biggest problems here.
And if you take a step back it's really hard to blame them for this. We can't expect them to understand everything about everything. (Well alright we can expect it but sorry.. it's really not feasible.)
The article even mentions this. The only way to truly determine "inevitable disclosure" would be to extend the case until the judge and/or jury can examine the practices and basis of the 2 companies involved to see if there would be a conflict. So let's say they do that. The person will still be unemployed during all that time as well as being saddled with rising legal bills.
Ah but I hear you say the phrase "testimony from Friends of the Court" regarding the technical issues. In an ideal world that would certainly help. But you're assuming that these "Friends" would be impartial. Not to sound too cynical here, but it's always seemed to me that impartiality is a pretty subjective thing.
What's the answer? I haven't a clue.
Do I like that it's happening? No.
Do I think the courts are doing the best they can? Maybe.
It seems like a bad situation all around that really has no cut and dry answer. I'd say the courts aren't the best venue to decide this sort of thing... but it's all we've got.
My friend I think you place too much faith in our local legislature.
Indiana has had a law (ever since I can remember) that no alcohol of any sort will be sold from a store on Sunday.
BUT (and this is the part that kills me) a few years they modified that law to where you could go to a restaurant and buy it to drink while you're sitting there.
So in effect you can't buy it, take it home and drink safely. No no. If you want to drink on Sunday you have to go OUT and do it then drive home.
Way to support those drunk driving laws guys. Thanks buckets.
To stay on topic though.. I think it has a mild effect but not to the point this guy says. If the job has sufficient compensations (in your opinion) then these annoyances can be overcome.
And I have my doubts like you whether that would be a Good Thing(tm).
I would be interested to know if the arbitration decision was even presented to the judge. I would hope the Respondent's attorney would be clueful enough to do that. If he did, then why didn't the judge say "This has already been settled in arbitration. Dismissed."?
Is it me or did this judge just pull all of ICANN's teeth with a crowbar?
What do we have here. ICANN came to a decision in arbitration in favor of the Respondent Planet Ref Inc. Referee Enterprises Inc. didn't like the outcome of arbitration so they went whining to a judge who overturned ICANN's decision.
So what kind of precedence does this set? This, in effect, tells anyone who doesn't like ICANN's decisions regarding domain disputes to go ahead and take it to court anyway.
I thought one of the purposes of ICANN was to keep this kind of stuff out of the courts.
Sure, the virus authors need to be held accountable, but if a virus or e-mail worm paralyzes a corporate intranet for a day and the point of injection can be determined, why not hold that user responsible as well, particularly if a virus alert has already been issued?
Odd that you should mention this. I did determine which one of my users opened it first. And while I didn't go to the extreme that you said of taking money from his pocket... I did send out a company-wide email jokingly pointing the finger at him (I called him a dead man).
A little public humiliation can go a long way. I will guarantee you that he'll think twice about opening attachments from now on.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone able to mirror these before the box went up in
The Blood Centers are saying that they're above capacity right now and are asking people to come back either next week or even later as reported here.
I saw a spokesperson on the Today Show this morning saying much the same thing. He mentioned that they need to stagger this supply chain.
All in all it's comforting to see people turn out in these kinds of numbers. I'm not saying that you shouldn't donate but that you may want to wait and do it in a few days like these people are asking.
I think it would make a fine replacement for my current user LART that has "Louisville Slugger" branded into it.
So much for not load testing it...
Are they going to notice the difference? Probably not.
Granted this is nice information to have. But I don't see the average user caring much. The MP3 format itself was lossy but no one seemed to care.
I feel your pain brother.
Substitue shoes for dress and LAN rack for hard drive and I'd swear I was the victim of that same conversation last week. 8^)
Is nice to know that there are certain constants in the Universe yes?
I dunno about that. With the speed it's loading my money's on his webserver going first. Sure hope he doesn't use that to code on because it looks like it's about to be a victim of the /. tactical strike.
Slackware Package Management
I find it works pretty well actually.
He would obviously be used to that kind of thing.
But it amazed me that Alter, whenever they were talking about making a copy, kept saying "when it's posted on the Internet".
Pardon? Who said that if you make a single copy that you're going to post it?
Seems to me that that's one hell of an assumption to make. I see what he's trying to do though. If he stipulates that it's fair use to have a backup copy that doesn't get posted then... his argument is screwed.
Check the Nightcap discography from the real Jethro Tull.
He was trolling way back in 1973. :)
Now even the blind can be subjected to your god-awful color schemes in the Apache and BSD sections.
Slackware SPARC
Watch this film. Then go watch 2010. Same author. Entirely different feel. What's the big difference?
Kubrick. And why is that?
Let me state right off the bat that I am a huge Kubrick fan. I am a fan of every movie he did. Even The Shining and I despise Stephen King's novels. (Don't even think about it. I'm wearing asbestos.)
This film is a very good representation of Kubrick's style. What defines Kubrick's style is his decision to NOT include sound. If you look at this film and say, for instance, The Shining, pay attention to the key scenes, i.e. those scenes that are the turning points in the movie.
1. In 2001, when Dave Bowman is in the pod trying to get back in the ship and he realizes HAL has lost his damned mind.
2. In The Shining, when Jack is in the restroom with the waiter and realizes that he's been setup by some unknown force to fulfill some unknown purpose.
Listen carefully to those 2 scenes.
What do you hear?
NOT A GODDAMMED THING. No music. No background noise. No sound effects. Nothing at all.
What made Kubrick the genius was his NON-use of sound. He realized that it was silence that caused tension.
Well that and his angles of photography. You can always tell what is a Kubrick movie. To me that is the sign of a true genius.
To make things worse imagine having the hiccups while playing with this thing responding to your forehead.
"Dude. What the hell are you shooting at?"
"Shut up! I've got the fscking hiccups!"
Pud wouldn't lie to us right?
RIGHT???
And if you take a step back it's really hard to blame them for this. We can't expect them to understand everything about everything. (Well alright we can expect it but sorry.. it's really not feasible.)
The article even mentions this. The only way to truly determine "inevitable disclosure" would be to extend the case until the judge and/or jury can examine the practices and basis of the 2 companies involved to see if there would be a conflict. So let's say they do that. The person will still be unemployed during all that time as well as being saddled with rising legal bills.
Ah but I hear you say the phrase "testimony from Friends of the Court" regarding the technical issues. In an ideal world that would certainly help. But you're assuming that these "Friends" would be impartial. Not to sound too cynical here, but it's always seemed to me that impartiality is a pretty subjective thing.
What's the answer? I haven't a clue.
Do I like that it's happening? No.
Do I think the courts are doing the best they can? Maybe.
It seems like a bad situation all around that really has no cut and dry answer. I'd say the courts aren't the best venue to decide this sort of thing... but it's all we've got.
Is that the direction we're going?
Why wasn't I told this? Who decided this? Did I miss a /. poll or something?
Dammit Malda you never tell us anything in advance.
"Hold on just a second. I have to get something from my pocket."
*flick* *flick*
*crackle*
"Burn baby burn!"
www.scambusters.org
Indiana has had a law (ever since I can remember) that no alcohol of any sort will be sold from a store on Sunday.
BUT (and this is the part that kills me) a few years they modified that law to where you could go to a restaurant and buy it to drink while you're sitting there.
So in effect you can't buy it, take it home and drink safely. No no. If you want to drink on Sunday you have to go OUT and do it then drive home.
Way to support those drunk driving laws guys. Thanks buckets.
To stay on topic though.. I think it has a mild effect but not to the point this guy says. If the job has sufficient compensations (in your opinion) then these annoyances can be overcome.
And I have my doubts like you whether that would be a Good Thing(tm).
I would be interested to know if the arbitration decision was even presented to the judge. I would hope the Respondent's attorney would be clueful enough to do that. If he did, then why didn't the judge say "This has already been settled in arbitration. Dismissed."?
What do we have here. ICANN came to a decision in arbitration in favor of the Respondent Planet Ref Inc. Referee Enterprises Inc. didn't like the outcome of arbitration so they went whining to a judge who overturned ICANN's decision.
So what kind of precedence does this set? This, in effect, tells anyone who doesn't like ICANN's decisions regarding domain disputes to go ahead and take it to court anyway.
I thought one of the purposes of ICANN was to keep this kind of stuff out of the courts.
Heh. Lameness filter prevents us from just posting a date? 2001-03-14 05:25:00
Odd that you should mention this. I did determine which one of my users opened it first. And while I didn't go to the extreme that you said of taking money from his pocket... I did send out a company-wide email jokingly pointing the finger at him (I called him a dead man).
A little public humiliation can go a long way. I will guarantee you that he'll think twice about opening attachments from now on.