Why don't these people just get over themselves and go for prohibition again?
Drunk driving, while obviously a bad thing, is probaly the single most blown out of proportion issue in the United States.
If you actually get your hands on a study proclaiming that 70% (or whatever unrealistically high percentage) of crashes are "alcohol-related", look at the methodology. Crashes where the driver was perfectly fine, but a passenger had A DRINK were considered "alcohol-related"... as was a closed case of beer in the trunk.
Traffic statistics are among the most abused and oft cited. The folks who sell highway signs claim that 60% of accidents are caused by bad signage; police unions say that speedng causes up to 75% of crashes.
If you know who they are, you can filter their mail or report their criminal activity.
A big time spammer forced to identify himself would not stay in business for long. The anonyminity is the most important aspect of their business model.
Charging per email is the wrong thing to charge for.
What you want to charge for is verifiable proof of your identity.
What does that mean?
Senders must either present a verifyable email certificate OR authenticate with an email server which has its own certificate.
The real problem with spam is that I cannot filter it. If I can positively identify the Penis Pill Corp, then I can block it. Likewise, I can reliably block my ex girlfriend or mother in law or whomever I want -- because I know who is sending the message.
Displaying to your children that selective adherence to the law is a good moral practice?
Does a good parent commit felonies on an ongoing basis? What kind of shape will the family be in when mom & dad get hauled off to prison and the kids become wards of the state?
The basis of anti-narcotics laws in the United States stems from the food & drug safety laws enacted in the late 19th century.
These food & drug acts designated certain substances as "controlled" substances, which can only be dispensed to a consumer with the explicit consent of a medical practitioner. These laws were passed to protect consumers from slick salespeople peddling sugared water as expensive miracle medicines.
Spam is a very similar problem. Which makes it very attracive to the penis-pill peddlers and other modern-day snake oil salesmen.
The problem is in the case of drugs, the "controlled" object is a pill. In the case of spam, the "controlled substance" is speech.
Do you really want the government to be determining what is spam and what isn't? Turning spam into a form of "controlled speech" sets a very bad precedent.
Especially since spam really isn't the problem that we face -- in reality the problem is the archaic SMTP transport protocol, which provides NO assurance that the sender, recipient or mail servers are who they say they are.
Fix the protocol, and you have solved the spam problem.
Insisting that Linux be called GNU/Linux is far more invasive than having a "Portions of this product are (C) copyright......" on a manual page or an about window or whatever.
Stallman cannot legally compel anyone to call Linux GNU/Linux, but wields a considerable amount of (well deserved) influence that has persuaded many people to do so.
6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions.
You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License.
The advertising clause is considered a further restriction.
Now personally, I do not believe that attribution is any more burdensome than having to make source code publicly available or agreeing to automatically allow your software to be covered by a future revision of the GPL.
Judging by Mr. Stallman's ravacious vanity and thirst for attribution (ie. GNU/*), I find it ironic that the FSF would discourage compulsory attribution.
If diagnostics software actually worked... you wouldn't have a business, and PC manufacturers wouldn't operate call centers.
Learn to troubleshoot the hardware that you are fixing rather than learning to divine meaningful answers from some stupid piece of software.
BTW the magic diagnostic software is probaly just dumping tables from WMI (Windows Management Interface) anyway. you can do the same with a SQL client and driver available from Microsoft.
Back in the old days (like 5 years ago) whatever little company Cingular gobbled up in my area was like 10x worse than Cingular.
Apparently rural areas were run by francised tower operators who frequently billed Cingular late or quarterly or something...
So you'd drive into an affected rural area and use the phone for a couple of emergency calls (remember this is expensive roaming in those days)... then you wouldn't get a bill!
Strange, eh?
Well what would end up happening is that you would get billed for like three months of usage in one bill! So if you had a 500 minute plan, you'd use nothing for two months, then get slammed with 600 minutes of usage in one month! Then you'd either spend 90 minutes on the phone with customer disservice or pay the bill...
Or security and access roles compatible with HIPPA regulations?
Or reliable data recovery compatible with large-scale backup systems like Legato or TSM or Veritas?
MySQL cannot do these things. A RDBMS like DB2 or Oracle can deliver an incredible amount of value for certain applications, particularly things like high-volume transaction processing.
You need to use the right tool for the right job. MySQL is the right choice for alot of database applications... but certainly not all of them.
And btw when I say "commercial support", I'm not talking about technical support. I'm talking about application compatability. As an example, DB2 v8.1 is built at specific distributions of Red Hat, Suse and TurboLinux.
Subtle differences in glibc version, the version of gcc the distro was built with or kernel changes can easily break binary distributions of software, so IBM won't support DB2 on Mandrake Linux or Debian or whatever...
Since Sun has been losing money for almost five years and is trading at 3x book value at its current state (with its market distintigrating more and more ever day) and Red Hat has a P/E ratio of 384, I would assert that both of their market caps are grossly out of line with their true value.
Think about their businesses... Red Hat sells free software... Sun sells overpriced hardware that nobody wants.
Hmm you might need Cygwin or the WXP/2k resource kit to get the command.
My laptop is far from the typical office workstation... I have to run an app ported to Interix, so I have MS Services for Unix, cygwin and some other toolkits that may contain strings.
I know for sure strings.exe is available with cygwin, give it a spin...
Standardizing on Debian is a really lousy idea. At some point, your customer is likely to need or want commercial software (esp RDBMS), and they will find that Debian is simply not supported by any commercial software vendor. (To be honest, most non-Linux geeks have never heard of Debian)
Go with Red Hat or Suse. You might find that going with a more stable (from a support POV) Unix OS like Solaris may be a good choice for certain systems as well. The support costs are real, but a Tivoli Management environment would cost a helluva lot more if the IBM salesfolk talk your client into it.
If you in a signifigant transaction processing business, the money will come - spend the money now to start a Maestro or Tuxedo system so you don't need to waste valuable time (and lose business) later.
I also hate to say this a longtime Debian fan... but the major commercial distros aren't going anywhere. RedHat and Suse have built brands and have major money & support flowing in from corps like IBM & HP. Can the same be said for Debian, whose stable release is starting to get a little crusty?
Remember to ask yourself what you & your client needs and what is best for the business. Keep the tech-geek religious wars on Slashdot!
Your comment is inane to anyone who was involved in any way with the computer industry in 1997.
What was your alternative to Windows NT or 95-OSR1 in 1997? A $7000 Ultra 5 with Solaris 2.5.1 & CDE? Red Hat 5.2??? Netware?
Like it or not, alot of people CHOSE Windows because a single vendor produced software that worked in a cost effective manner. Cheap x86 hardware and a well-integrated set of applications. Sun offered insanely expensive hardware with an obtuse GUI designed by commitee for military contracts.
Today Linux is becoming a legitimate alternative -- a flexible & powerful operating system without hardware lock-in. But that choice was not available in 1997.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe the BAC limits are the problem, and not the parking lots.
If the cops spent more time pulling over shitty drivers, drunk or not, the highways would be far safer than they are now.
Is this some sort of ESR quasi-religious babbling?
Why don't these people just get over themselves and go for prohibition again?
Drunk driving, while obviously a bad thing, is probaly the single most blown out of proportion issue in the United States.
If you actually get your hands on a study proclaiming that 70% (or whatever unrealistically high percentage) of crashes are "alcohol-related", look at the methodology. Crashes where the driver was perfectly fine, but a passenger had A DRINK were considered "alcohol-related"... as was a closed case of beer in the trunk.
Traffic statistics are among the most abused and oft cited. The folks who sell highway signs claim that 60% of accidents are caused by bad signage; police unions say that speedng causes up to 75% of crashes.
Give me a break.
ESR is an idiot wannbe Druid Chieftan. Nothing more.
He wrote a book and "maintains" some webmail program. Why does anyone even pay attention to him?
The only lesson that you teach your children by selling drugs is that your drugs & money are more important to you than they are.
If that's how you feel, don't have kids.
If you know who they are, you can filter their mail or report their criminal activity.
A big time spammer forced to identify himself would not stay in business for long. The anonyminity is the most important aspect of their business model.
Charging per email is the wrong thing to charge for.
What you want to charge for is verifiable proof of your identity.
What does that mean?
Senders must either present a verifyable email certificate OR authenticate with an email server which has its own certificate.
The real problem with spam is that I cannot filter it. If I can positively identify the Penis Pill Corp, then I can block it. Likewise, I can reliably block my ex girlfriend or mother in law or whomever I want -- because I know who is sending the message.
Good morals?
Displaying to your children that selective adherence to the law is a good moral practice?
Does a good parent commit felonies on an ongoing basis? What kind of shape will the family be in when mom & dad get hauled off to prison and the kids become wards of the state?
The basis of anti-narcotics laws in the United States stems from the food & drug safety laws enacted in the late 19th century.
These food & drug acts designated certain substances as "controlled" substances, which can only be dispensed to a consumer with the explicit consent of a medical practitioner. These laws were passed to protect consumers from slick salespeople peddling sugared water as expensive miracle medicines.
Spam is a very similar problem. Which makes it very attracive to the penis-pill peddlers and other modern-day snake oil salesmen.
The problem is in the case of drugs, the "controlled" object is a pill. In the case of spam, the "controlled substance" is speech.
Do you really want the government to be determining what is spam and what isn't? Turning spam into a form of "controlled speech" sets a very bad precedent.
Especially since spam really isn't the problem that we face -- in reality the problem is the archaic SMTP transport protocol, which provides NO assurance that the sender, recipient or mail servers are who they say they are.
Fix the protocol, and you have solved the spam problem.
Insisting that Linux be called GNU/Linux is far more invasive than having a "Portions of this product are (C) copyright ......" on a manual page or an about window or whatever.
Stallman cannot legally compel anyone to call Linux GNU/Linux, but wields a considerable amount of (well deserved) influence that has persuaded many people to do so.
The advertising clause is considered a further restriction.
Now personally, I do not believe that attribution is any more burdensome than having to make source code publicly available or agreeing to automatically allow your software to be covered by a future revision of the GPL.
Judging by Mr. Stallman's ravacious vanity and thirst for attribution (ie. GNU/*), I find it ironic that the FSF would discourage compulsory attribution.
I like to drive Hondas. Once I was driving down the street and my clutch started sticking.
So I stopped at best buy and purchased a dvd burner. Everything seemed ok after that.
Perhaps warmer ocean temperatures will encourage the growth of plankton, which are the largest consumers of CO2 gas in the atmosphere.
If diagnostics software actually worked... you wouldn't have a business, and PC manufacturers wouldn't operate call centers.
Learn to troubleshoot the hardware that you are fixing rather than learning to divine meaningful answers from some stupid piece of software.
BTW the magic diagnostic software is probaly just dumping tables from WMI (Windows Management Interface) anyway. you can do the same with a SQL client and driver available from Microsoft.
Back in the old days (like 5 years ago) whatever little company Cingular gobbled up in my area was like 10x worse than Cingular.
Apparently rural areas were run by francised tower operators who frequently billed Cingular late or quarterly or something...
So you'd drive into an affected rural area and use the phone for a couple of emergency calls (remember this is expensive roaming in those days)... then you wouldn't get a bill!
Strange, eh?
Well what would end up happening is that you would get billed for like three months of usage in one bill! So if you had a 500 minute plan, you'd use nothing for two months, then get slammed with 600 minutes of usage in one month! Then you'd either spend 90 minutes on the phone with customer disservice or pay the bill...
The web and cross platform technologies like Java and Perl have really made operating systems obsolete...
Why would you want to rehash a 10 or 15 year old OS?
How about database clustering?
Or remote replication?
Or security and access roles compatible with HIPPA regulations?
Or reliable data recovery compatible with large-scale backup systems like Legato or TSM or Veritas?
MySQL cannot do these things. A RDBMS like DB2 or Oracle can deliver an incredible amount of value for certain applications, particularly things like high-volume transaction processing.
You need to use the right tool for the right job. MySQL is the right choice for alot of database applications... but certainly not all of them.
And btw when I say "commercial support", I'm not talking about technical support. I'm talking about application compatability. As an example, DB2 v8.1 is built at specific distributions of Red Hat, Suse and TurboLinux.
Subtle differences in glibc version, the version of gcc the distro was built with or kernel changes can easily break binary distributions of software, so IBM won't support DB2 on Mandrake Linux or Debian or whatever...
Since Sun has been losing money for almost five years and is trading at 3x book value at its current state (with its market distintigrating more and more ever day) and Red Hat has a P/E ratio of 384, I would assert that both of their market caps are grossly out of line with their true value.
Think about their businesses... Red Hat sells free software... Sun sells overpriced hardware that nobody wants.
Hmm you might need Cygwin or the WXP/2k resource kit to get the command.
My laptop is far from the typical office workstation... I have to run an app ported to Interix, so I have MS Services for Unix, cygwin and some other toolkits that may contain strings.
I know for sure strings.exe is available with cygwin, give it a spin...
http://www.cygwin.com/
You're missing the point. X is an obvious example, there are plenty of others.
Standardizing on Debian is a really lousy idea. At some point, your customer is likely to need or want commercial software (esp RDBMS), and they will find that Debian is simply not supported by any commercial software vendor. (To be honest, most non-Linux geeks have never heard of Debian)
Go with Red Hat or Suse. You might find that going with a more stable (from a support POV) Unix OS like Solaris may be a good choice for certain systems as well. The support costs are real, but a Tivoli Management environment would cost a helluva lot more if the IBM salesfolk talk your client into it.
If you in a signifigant transaction processing business, the money will come - spend the money now to start a Maestro or Tuxedo system so you don't need to waste valuable time (and lose business) later.
I also hate to say this a longtime Debian fan... but the major commercial distros aren't going anywhere. RedHat and Suse have built brands and have major money & support flowing in from corps like IBM & HP. Can the same be said for Debian, whose stable release is starting to get a little crusty?
Remember to ask yourself what you & your client needs and what is best for the business. Keep the tech-geek religious wars on Slashdot!
open up a command window and type "strings c:\windows\system32\ftp.exe"
This will return:
The people making those calls are generally in the energy business, and stand to make billions from Ma Government to implement such a system...
Everybody else just wants to electricity to work. Which is exactly why so many people stood against utility de-regularion in the 90's.
Indeed. We all must consider ourselves incredibly lucky that the /. editors are not working on energy management software or embedded medical devices.
Subscribe to Slashdot -- we have to keep these guys employed and out of the real world!
Your comment is inane to anyone who was involved in any way with the computer industry in 1997.
What was your alternative to Windows NT or 95-OSR1 in 1997? A $7000 Ultra 5 with Solaris 2.5.1 & CDE? Red Hat 5.2??? Netware?
Like it or not, alot of people CHOSE Windows because a single vendor produced software that worked in a cost effective manner. Cheap x86 hardware and a well-integrated set of applications. Sun offered insanely expensive hardware with an obtuse GUI designed by commitee for military contracts.
Today Linux is becoming a legitimate alternative -- a flexible & powerful operating system without hardware lock-in. But that choice was not available in 1997.