That's why I use a dedicated Usenet provider where I find virtually no spam in any newsgroups that I subscribe to. Of course, I have to pay for that added service, but that's a good investment.
I would recommend to change your Usenet provider. Maybe take one where you have to pay a bit for it and who provides better service than your current provider.
With my provider, I don't see spam in the newsgroups that I subscribe to. I see less technical users leaving for their beloved Web fora, but that's actually a good thing. S2N ratio in many newsgroups almost returned back to the time before the AOL-me-too folks appeared.
In which world do you live? My wife bought an iPod, and Apple goes to great length to assure that this device is only manageable with a f*cking iTunes application. That's abusing their monopoly in my book. I want to manage *our* device that *we* own in the way that *we* want, thank you very much.
Luckily, libgpod supported it after a year, when they broke Apples protection method.
Well, you forgot to tell the real content: Monsters are irrelevant and can be handled. The real hell is high school and the folks around you. And that struck a chord with many people in that age and made Buffy a hit show; but obviously you forgot such issues and did not recognize it.
> > In most of Europe only the MP's are directly elected and they control a government > > made up of appointed officials.
> You mean the civil service? We have one of those, but there's some debate about who controls whom.
No, he means the government, i.e., the executive: all ministers, the president, chancellor if one has them. In most European countries the executive branch is not elected, not even the president, but appointed by the parlament. Just as the EU commission members are appointed, as they are part of the executive.
You might wine about the fact that you can neither elect your minister of defense, nor your EU commission members, nor any other members of your government, but that's the way our republics work.
Well, the TSA is more successful in the actual goal of terrorism: To install fear in the hearts of US citizens, and destroy the civil base that your society was grounded upon, once upon a time. They put 100,000s of people on secret watch lists and the US society let that happen.
In my country, such behaviour once was typical of its "secret state police". That part of my country was then named German Democratic Republic, and then Americans scowled about these so-called `socialistic' states (who were never socialistic, neither in the political nor in the oeconomic sense). Now they quickly install such a state themselves. It's a pitty, really.
Hey, our IT staff is 5 out of 6 people. The 6th also has a M.Sc. in Computer Science, as we all have at least, and is just most of the time too busy with business management contracts to handle technical contracts.
Why do we do our IT ourselves? This is sometimes called "eating your own dog food", if we recommend stuff to our customers, we need to know it.
And don't tell me we're mismanaged, I'm the CEO.;-)
Or, in other words: Don't judge other businesses where you have no idea what they're doing.
Do you realize that your list is the perfect example why people from more civilized countries think that the US society gives its police too much power to harrass their citizens?
Your list with recommended behaviour itself is almost identical to the list we got 20+ years ago when we visited former socialistic Eastern Germany or other USSR-related countries. That's not ironic, that's sad.
Well, (1) I want to access PST file content on non-Windows systems. E.g., for a search engine. (2) I want to access PST file content on systems where COM-embedding has been turned off for "security reasons". (One of our bank customers has that.) If I think more about it, I might even find more use cases.
I.e., not everybody in the world has your limited use cases. I welcome the opening of the PST specs.
While you are rather correct in your iPod analysis, the rest of us are debating Palm PRE's disabled syncing with iTunes.
Citing yourself, emphasis by me:
There is a public, well-established API to get stuff into and out of iTunes/iPods
The discussion started with iTunes -- and here I agree with you that there is a public API, btw -- and you enhanced that statement to the iPod, as cited above. I called BS on that enhancement and just that enhancement, also cited above, and still do. Since the rest of your post is only concerned with iTunes synchronisation (which I did not even mention in my post), I consider it a strawman to deflect from your invalid enhancement.
Oh yeah, and leave your accusations of karma whoring at home. We are both long enough here that we should not fall so low; I suspect we both can't increase our karma any more.
Yes, OMMV with any iPod touch device that must be jailbreaked first; an illegal action according to Apple. And Apple is not shy with legal threats, see http://www.eff.org/press/archives/2009/04/27
So MM not just varies, it is quite the opposite of yours. Apple's business tactics show that one should avoid their products, even if they're technically better. Sleeping with the enemy is dangerous.
The GP doesn't mean the database of the iTunes software, but on the iPod device, crypthographically protected by Apple, and with legal threats against reverse engineering (wit iPod touch 2.x)
This is rubbish, and those who modded that insightful will hopefully get slapped at metamoderation.
There is no public API for iPods. That's the reason why you need that horrible stinking application experience called iTunes (and a Mac or Windows XP/Vista) to manage music on an iPod. Apple specifically protects iPod music management by cryptographic means; luckily for some devices weak enough to get broken (see http://ipodlinux.org/Device_Information), but that's the opposite of a public API.
That said - if you know a description of the public unencumbered API for managing the music database on an iPod, post it's URL, and I will apologize. Until then, you're just an Apple fanboy, modded too high by other fanboys.
When DEK dies, TeX's version number is set to $\pi$ (and Metafont's version number to $\varepsilon$, incidentally). Then there are no bugs in this applications any more, by definition, then these are canonical features.
Not that it will really matter, really few folks use DEK's original TeX program anymore -- we'll probably all using LuaTeX by then...
This is not about celebrity science, this is about role models. And, as scientific studies show, role models are important for field selection and motivation of pupils and students.
I live in Germany, and it is quite common here that in November a higher monthly wage is paid, both for hourly-paid workers (however that is commonly called in English) and for salaried workers. That additional payment is colloquially called "Xmas money". Alone for such non-regular payments only annual numbers make sense.
For employees with a very high percentage of variable payment or for self-employed folks, it is common here to name a range for the annual salary that shows the expected range of bonuses one likely gets. E.g., I'm the CEO of a tech consulting company, and my variable payment is usually around 30% of my annual income. Just naming my fixed income would not provide any meaningful amount.
Quoting salries per years is usually more objective because it includes variable parts like bonusses, options, and other payments that are not done monthly.
Dunno if Indian IT workers have them, but they are common in the Western World and thus there this type of quotation is preferred.
Yes, and that's the way it's actually done, isn't it? Real names of variables are actually addresses or offsets on heap or stack, and the symbolic names in your programs are functional descriptions. Owing to variable aliasing, you might even have several names for the same thing. Just like with system names -- there are host names and there are service names; and there is an n:m relationship between them. On one host may run several services and all should have their own names, and a service might run on several hosts (e.g., in a fail-over cluster).
So, your metapher is actually a good one; though I suspect not by intent.
After all, the question was not how services are named -- these should be functional and spell out the purpose, all right, just like your variable names. The question was how hosts are named; and as outlined several times in other postings functional naming for them is a Bad Idea(tm), because their functionality might change rather quickly.
Actually, on almost all current systems, local X doesn't use sockets, but shared memory. This is available via the MIT-SHM extension since 1991, i.e., since 17 years. No pixmap copying, no serialization/deserialization as one other respondent claims.
All folks who claim that X's problems lay in it's *ability* to use clients over a network are 17 years late. I.e., they have no clue at all. There are problems with X, but they are elsewhere.
activists at the Republican National Convention in Minneapolis used it to provide information on police movements. 'Twitter is already used by some members to post and/or support extremist ideologies and perspectives
This is more than reporting capabilities. This is judging its use, and using odd criteria for that judgement.
I don't know if you want to be funny, but for other readers who don't know German: "Flugplatz" is the German word for "airport".
And it may well be that the streets there are really named Flugplatz, it is not uncommon to name a street that leads to a site that way. I don't know since I don't live in that area and have never been to Ramstein air base itself.
Ah, trying to wiggle out of dumb comments. Sorry, I didn't know that one needs to spell out the argument for you; I thought you were able grok it yourself.
The P^3 argues that one cannot exchange a component in a Ford car that Ford has selected, when buying that car, if Ford doesn't offer that option. Just like you cannot exchange Windows in a TP when Lenovo does not offer that option. You argue that's different because MS didn't make the TP. But Ford did not make the car's software or most of the car's component either. I.e., the car's software vendor or the car's brake vendor didn't make a Ford car either, just like MS didn't make the TP. So, by your argument, we should be able to demand a Ford car without that "software tax", or -- maybe even more illustrative -- without that "brake tax" that Ford pays to its supplier, because you don't want that specific component. And please don't start to argue that people wouldn't want to exchange the brakes in their car: The car modding subcomunity is probably much greater than the community of people who want to run Linux on a TP.
To which, incidentially, I belong. I installed my first Linux on a TP in 1996, on Butterfly; and I don't even run Windows on any of the 7 TPs that I own. But still I'm able to see economic realities, different to you.
OK; in hindsight, I retract my statement. You're not naive. You're silly, including those MS bashers who modded you Insightful.
If you really think that Ford makes it own cars with all components inside it, including all the software that runs in it, you're really very very naive.
That's not differen at all to the computer market, automotive companies buy from OEM vendors (and from each others) big chunks of technology.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why I use a dedicated Usenet provider where I find virtually no spam in any newsgroups that I subscribe to. Of course, I have to pay for that added service, but that's a good investment.
With my provider, I don't see spam in the newsgroups that I subscribe to. I see less technical users leaving for their beloved Web fora, but that's actually a good thing. S2N ratio in many newsgroups almost returned back to the time before the AOL-me-too folks appeared.
You don't have a wife, do you?
Luckily, libgpod supported it after a year, when they broke Apples protection method.
Well, you forgot to tell the real content: Monsters are irrelevant and can be handled. The real hell is high school and the folks around you. And that struck a chord with many people in that age and made Buffy a hit show; but obviously you forgot such issues and did not recognize it.
> > In most of Europe only the MP's are directly elected and they control a government
> > made up of appointed officials.
> You mean the civil service? We have one of those, but there's some debate about who controls whom.
No, he means the government, i.e., the executive: all ministers, the president, chancellor if one has them. In most European countries the executive branch is not elected, not even the president, but appointed by the parlament. Just as the EU commission members are appointed, as they are part of the executive.
You might wine about the fact that you can neither elect your minister of defense, nor your EU commission members, nor any other members of your government, but that's the way our republics work.
In my country, such behaviour once was typical of its "secret state police". That part of my country was then named German Democratic Republic, and then Americans scowled about these so-called `socialistic' states (who were never socialistic, neither in the political nor in the oeconomic sense). Now they quickly install such a state themselves. It's a pitty, really.
Why do we do our IT ourselves? This is sometimes called "eating your own dog food", if we recommend stuff to our customers, we need to know it.
And don't tell me we're mismanaged, I'm the CEO. ;-)
Or, in other words: Don't judge other businesses where you have no idea what they're doing.
Your list with recommended behaviour itself is almost identical to the list we got 20+ years ago when we visited former socialistic Eastern Germany or other USSR-related countries. That's not ironic, that's sad.
I.e., not everybody in the world has your limited use cases. I welcome the opening of the PST specs.
Thanks, Joachim
Citing yourself, emphasis by me:
The discussion started with iTunes -- and here I agree with you that there is a public API, btw -- and you enhanced that statement to the iPod, as cited above. I called BS on that enhancement and just that enhancement, also cited above, and still do. Since the rest of your post is only concerned with iTunes synchronisation (which I did not even mention in my post), I consider it a strawman to deflect from your invalid enhancement.
Oh yeah, and leave your accusations of karma whoring at home. We are both long enough here that we should not fall so low; I suspect we both can't increase our karma any more.
So MM not just varies, it is quite the opposite of yours. Apple's business tactics show that one should avoid their products, even if they're technically better. Sleeping with the enemy is dangerous.
The GP doesn't mean the database of the iTunes software, but on the iPod device, crypthographically protected by Apple, and with legal threats against reverse engineering (wit iPod touch 2.x)
There is no public API for iPods. That's the reason why you need that horrible stinking application experience called iTunes (and a Mac or Windows XP/Vista) to manage music on an iPod. Apple specifically protects iPod music management by cryptographic means; luckily for some devices weak enough to get broken (see http://ipodlinux.org/Device_Information), but that's the opposite of a public API.
That said - if you know a description of the public unencumbered API for managing the music database on an iPod, post it's URL, and I will apologize. Until then, you're just an Apple fanboy, modded too high by other fanboys.
When DEK dies, TeX's version number is set to $\pi$ (and Metafont's version number to $\varepsilon$, incidentally). Then there are no bugs in this applications any more, by definition, then these are canonical features.
Not that it will really matter, really few folks use DEK's original TeX program anymore -- we'll probably all using LuaTeX by then...
This is not about celebrity science, this is about role models. And, as scientific studies show, role models are important for field selection and motivation of pupils and students.
For employees with a very high percentage of variable payment or for self-employed folks, it is common here to name a range for the annual salary that shows the expected range of bonuses one likely gets. E.g., I'm the CEO of a tech consulting company, and my variable payment is usually around 30% of my annual income. Just naming my fixed income would not provide any meaningful amount.
Dunno if Indian IT workers have them, but they are common in the Western World and thus there this type of quotation is preferred.
So, your metapher is actually a good one; though I suspect not by intent.
After all, the question was not how services are named -- these should be functional and spell out the purpose, all right, just like your variable names. The question was how hosts are named; and as outlined several times in other postings functional naming for them is a Bad Idea(tm), because their functionality might change rather quickly.
All folks who claim that X's problems lay in it's *ability* to use clients over a network are 17 years late. I.e., they have no clue at all. There are problems with X, but they are elsewhere.
This is more than reporting capabilities. This is judging its use, and using odd criteria for that judgement.
And it may well be that the streets there are really named Flugplatz, it is not uncommon to name a street that leads to a site that way. I don't know since I don't live in that area and have never been to Ramstein air base itself.
The P^3 argues that one cannot exchange a component in a Ford car that Ford has selected, when buying that car, if Ford doesn't offer that option. Just like you cannot exchange Windows in a TP when Lenovo does not offer that option. You argue that's different because MS didn't make the TP. But Ford did not make the car's software or most of the car's component either. I.e., the car's software vendor or the car's brake vendor didn't make a Ford car either, just like MS didn't make the TP. So, by your argument, we should be able to demand a Ford car without that "software tax", or -- maybe even more illustrative -- without that "brake tax" that Ford pays to its supplier, because you don't want that specific component. And please don't start to argue that people wouldn't want to exchange the brakes in their car: The car modding subcomunity is probably much greater than the community of people who want to run Linux on a TP.
To which, incidentially, I belong. I installed my first Linux on a TP in 1996, on Butterfly; and I don't even run Windows on any of the 7 TPs that I own. But still I'm able to see economic realities, different to you.
OK; in hindsight, I retract my statement. You're not naive. You're silly, including those MS bashers who modded you Insightful.
That's not differen at all to the computer market, automotive companies buy from OEM vendors (and from each others) big chunks of technology.