Me three! However, I failed to get it running. Can't get my network running. I have no idea what's going on, and I had two hackers working on it for me for two hours without getting anywhere. So, I'm back to 2.4.7-10 (came with RH7.2)
For my thesis in astrophysics, I have almost exclusively used the R-system. I find it brilliant. It was developed for statistic, but IMHO, it can be used for any numerical computational task, though in some areas, it may need more development (for example, it lacks 2D FFT, but that should be easy to fix.
Well, yes, that is probably the intention yes, but what we all know is that when apologetics say "this law is not intended to land you in prison for [this and that]", unfortunately, as time passes they are often proved wrong.
Insert "proving to the public that an expensive security system is flawed" for [this and that], and you'll see what I mean.
Me three! I have six domains registered through Spy Productions, and it was extremely fast to change domain information. Everything seemed quite secure too, and the people there clearly have clues, so I recommend them.
No, the religious issue is with you, you're the one who wants to believe. We're asking for proof.
Then, it's not about belief, it's about evidence.
Without the principle of "innocent untill proven guilty", anybody can point their finger at anybody, and whoever screams the loudest can kill whoever they want.
You just wait for the day when somebody calls you a terrorist!
Doing that does not change the poster's point. His point is the most insightful in this thread: Indeed, it is the society as a whole that needs security, not just the government. You can make a lot of damage to the society without hitting the government at all. We all know that it wouldn't be hard to take out a huge fraction of all Windoze computers for some time, if a trojan was designed for that purpose, rather than designed for making a lot of fuzz. That would be damaging to the economy. It is not difficult to think of other examples.
And that is exactly why it is so incredibly stupid to restrict the use of encryption to combat terrorism.
There are some very important points here. The above is something from the Russell-Einstein manifesto, and its essense: That weapons of mass destruction are available and in such a quantity it is not difficult to kill mankind, and even if those weapons are destroyed, the knowledge will always be there, and the weapons can be rebuilt within a short time if necessary.
Thus, for the survival of our species, there is no option but to make an end to all conditions were weapons of mass destruction may be deployed.
This is no less important today, because today, those weapons are so easily available.
Obviously, there are risks of openness, but a closed society will be unbearable, and most probably no more secure.
Real security can only be achieved by renouncing war.
I don't think you are very far from what RMS wants. It is just that he has found a way to get there more slowly, and I would say more cleverly. It's a long discussion, really.
I'm using PNGs if I can. No GIFs. PNGs are better, it's as simple as that.
And, Unisys is bullying. You know, I thought I'd convert some of my PNGs to GIFs before people started complaining. But they went after the people writing convert, so I couldn't. But nobody has complained, so I don't care about GIFs.
Well, why the hell are people buying crap for vendors who are so actively pushing CPRM-stuff? I just bought a harddrive, but the first point was that I would only buy from vendors who voted against the CPRM-stuff. IBM are the ones who are pushing CPRM, and if you buy a harddrive from them, you are directly financing those efforts. So don't.
After buying the harddrive, I sent a notice to the people I did buy from, telling them I bought it because they voted no.
No, can't agree. The problem with spam is the bandwidth it wastes. Spammers steal bandwidth. This would only waste more bandwidth, and I seriously doubt it would have any effect on the amount of spam at all.
Funny! Liveprayer just started to spam me last night, and they've promised to spam me every night for as long as they live. I hope that won't be long, but...
Yeah. BTW, I would recommend people to do what I've done to keep informed, and thus be able to post this story: Subscribe to the w3c-announce mailing list. I remember getting the announcement there, I just hadn't the time to read it then and there. I wish I had now...
The W3C has, AFAIK, never pretended to be a standards body. It issues Recommendations, not standards. It is indeed a industry consortium. The reason for this is probably very complex, I'm not going into details.
However, certain technologies have been standardized, mostly in cooperation with IETF, but there is also a ISO version of HTML, so HTML is a standard. ISO-HTML is even stricter than W3C's HTML 4.01 Strict.
Hehe, you guys haven't got much confidence in your government. Well, I can understand that. But you really need to look at taxes differently. You get what you pay for, you know. If you don't pay taxes, you get a sucky government...:-)
Besides, I find spam a very serious threat to my freedom of speech, as it is about to kill many important fora I've spent years building up. If the S/N is bad enough, a forum becomes useless, and so the exchange of ideas are hurt.
So, yes, I really appreciate my own government's efforts to spank the spammers.
I have been thinking along the same lines untill recently. I'm in Norway, and I guess europeans generally have more confidence in their representatives than americans, but we certainly have our share of bad laws.
There were several things that made me change my mind. First of all, the amount of spam I've been getting is steadily increasing, and there is no sign any private measures have any effect whatsoever. I have even given up complaining about most of my spam.
Also, blacklist doesn't seem to have an appreciable effect either, I have become increasingly displeased with them.
Then, we got some anti-spam legislation here in Norway. I must say, I was impressed. Those who wrote it seem to have had basic training in NANAE, and the law wasn't overbroad either. When I read it, I found this law to be good. However, I realize that other anti-spam laws may not be.
Another thing was something that happened to me a week ago. I got spam through Hotmail. Yes, through Hotmail. Couldn't be high volume spam, but it certainly was spam. Also, the spam was in English, but sent through an ISP in Norway. I fired off a LART, and the ISP responded: "No, we can't whack this spammer, because he was using hotmail, and so there is no record of this spam incidence in our mail-logs, and we do not log what pages our customers visit on the web." At first, I was pissed, and starting writing a flame, telling them to log everything and whack this spammer or else, I would nominate them for the RBL.
But, coming to my senses, that they didn't log any web activity at all, is a Good Thing[tm]. It means, you have good privacy there. It is not only that they won't give your records to whoever asks for them, they can't. Yes, I'd like to have that kind of privacy.
However, this effectively means that ISPs cannot have a role in spam fighting, as they will not know if an allegded spammer is a spammer or have been joed. So, there goes the possibility of fighting spam privately, pretty much.
Instead, I'd like laws that bans spam. I believe that would have a huge effect. The most common spammer-excuse is that "it isn't illegal", so if it were, it would take out most of the spam. If I only got one spam a month, it wouldn't really be a problem, and if I could hand the spammer over to someone who would spank the spammer for me, I think it would be great.
However, I'd like to see laws
were ISPs have no role in monitoring their users, but instead, if I get a spam a month, I report it, and given a court order, police could gather evidence, not by looking through the logs of ISPs, because they should exists for no other purpose than ensuring the integrity of the system, but e.g. grab the spammer's computer and check for evidence there. I would very much prefer this to the possibility of ISPs having to log everything. I wouldn't expect spam to be a problem for very long after something like that was first enforced...
Right now, I think about 90% of my spam comes from US sources, so the clueful Norwegian legislation has very little practical effect. I've got the Consumer Ombudsman (which is the agency we report spammers to) onto Nokia for a couple of spam runs (Nokia's hardware is excellent, but their marketing department needs a few clues). Therefore, I really hope the US would get good legislation in place rather fast. Then, I think we would be in the position to block countries that does not make good legislation back to the stone age: If they would like to communicate internationally, they need to spank spammers, or else their e-mail will be forwarded to Dave Null.
To address the example: CSS is entirely Håkon Wium Lie's baby, and I know him, and he's a really good guy. He is now CTO of Opera, but joined because he believed that Opera is needed to maintain the diversity in browsers. He is a firm believer in the necessity of open standards, and I'm sure nothing will get in the way of that.
Slashdot Mirror
The distinction lies in if the act is useful to society. Some cases of cracking are certainly useful to society, shooting your neighbor is not.
Me three! However, I failed to get it running. Can't get my network running. I have no idea what's going on, and I had two hackers working on it for me for two hours without getting anywhere. So, I'm back to 2.4.7-10 (came with RH7.2)
Actually, they do. On the looong term. Haven't you been singing the Free Software Song?
R comes with Woody (Next Debian release).
Insert "proving to the public that an expensive security system is flawed" for [this and that], and you'll see what I mean.
Me three! I have six domains registered through Spy Productions, and it was extremely fast to change domain information. Everything seemed quite secure too, and the people there clearly have clues, so I recommend them.
Without the principle of "innocent untill proven guilty", anybody can point their finger at anybody, and whoever screams the loudest can kill whoever they want.
You just wait for the day when somebody calls you a terrorist!
With Hitler, there is lots of evidence.
And that is exactly why it is so incredibly stupid to restrict the use of encryption to combat terrorism.
No. You're not the only one reading nanae... :-)
There are some very important points here. The above is something from the Russell-Einstein manifesto, and its essense: That weapons of mass destruction are available and in such a quantity it is not difficult to kill mankind, and even if those weapons are destroyed, the knowledge will always be there, and the weapons can be rebuilt within a short time if necessary.
Thus, for the survival of our species, there is no option but to make an end to all conditions were weapons of mass destruction may be deployed.
This is no less important today, because today, those weapons are so easily available.
Obviously, there are risks of openness, but a closed society will be unbearable, and most probably no more secure.
Real security can only be achieved by renouncing war.
I don't think you are very far from what RMS wants. It is just that he has found a way to get there more slowly, and I would say more cleverly. It's a long discussion, really.
And, Unisys is bullying. You know, I thought I'd convert some of my PNGs to GIFs before people started complaining. But they went after the people writing convert, so I couldn't. But nobody has complained, so I don't care about GIFs.
After buying the harddrive, I sent a notice to the people I did buy from, telling them I bought it because they voted no.
No, can't agree. The problem with spam is the bandwidth it wastes. Spammers steal bandwidth. This would only waste more bandwidth, and I seriously doubt it would have any effect on the amount of spam at all.
The funny thing is that that is how RBL works....
That this bit is rubbish. If they do not use confirm subscriptions, they haven't gotten permission. It is as simple as that.
Wow. That's about the most ignorant thing I've heard on /.! So, you don't mind me going off to subscribe your address to 2352 porn mailing lists, then?
Funny! Liveprayer just started to spam me last night, and they've promised to spam me every night for as long as they live. I hope that won't be long, but...
They were. I saw them. I just didn't have time to read them.
Yeah. BTW, I would recommend people to do what I've done to keep informed, and thus be able to post this story: Subscribe to the w3c-announce mailing list. I remember getting the announcement there, I just hadn't the time to read it then and there. I wish I had now...
However, certain technologies have been standardized, mostly in cooperation with IETF, but there is also a ISO version of HTML, so HTML is a standard. ISO-HTML is even stricter than W3C's HTML 4.01 Strict.
Besides, I find spam a very serious threat to my freedom of speech, as it is about to kill many important fora I've spent years building up. If the S/N is bad enough, a forum becomes useless, and so the exchange of ideas are hurt. So, yes, I really appreciate my own government's efforts to spank the spammers.
There were several things that made me change my mind. First of all, the amount of spam I've been getting is steadily increasing, and there is no sign any private measures have any effect whatsoever. I have even given up complaining about most of my spam.
Also, blacklist doesn't seem to have an appreciable effect either, I have become increasingly displeased with them.
Then, we got some anti-spam legislation here in Norway. I must say, I was impressed. Those who wrote it seem to have had basic training in NANAE, and the law wasn't overbroad either. When I read it, I found this law to be good. However, I realize that other anti-spam laws may not be.
Another thing was something that happened to me a week ago. I got spam through Hotmail. Yes, through Hotmail. Couldn't be high volume spam, but it certainly was spam. Also, the spam was in English, but sent through an ISP in Norway. I fired off a LART, and the ISP responded: "No, we can't whack this spammer, because he was using hotmail, and so there is no record of this spam incidence in our mail-logs, and we do not log what pages our customers visit on the web." At first, I was pissed, and starting writing a flame, telling them to log everything and whack this spammer or else, I would nominate them for the RBL.
But, coming to my senses, that they didn't log any web activity at all, is a Good Thing[tm]. It means, you have good privacy there. It is not only that they won't give your records to whoever asks for them, they can't. Yes, I'd like to have that kind of privacy.
However, this effectively means that ISPs cannot have a role in spam fighting, as they will not know if an allegded spammer is a spammer or have been joed. So, there goes the possibility of fighting spam privately, pretty much.
Instead, I'd like laws that bans spam. I believe that would have a huge effect. The most common spammer-excuse is that "it isn't illegal", so if it were, it would take out most of the spam. If I only got one spam a month, it wouldn't really be a problem, and if I could hand the spammer over to someone who would spank the spammer for me, I think it would be great.
However, I'd like to see laws were ISPs have no role in monitoring their users, but instead, if I get a spam a month, I report it, and given a court order, police could gather evidence, not by looking through the logs of ISPs, because they should exists for no other purpose than ensuring the integrity of the system, but e.g. grab the spammer's computer and check for evidence there. I would very much prefer this to the possibility of ISPs having to log everything. I wouldn't expect spam to be a problem for very long after something like that was first enforced. ..
Right now, I think about 90% of my spam comes from US sources, so the clueful Norwegian legislation has very little practical effect. I've got the Consumer Ombudsman (which is the agency we report spammers to) onto Nokia for a couple of spam runs (Nokia's hardware is excellent, but their marketing department needs a few clues). Therefore, I really hope the US would get good legislation in place rather fast. Then, I think we would be in the position to block countries that does not make good legislation back to the stone age: If they would like to communicate internationally, they need to spank spammers, or else their e-mail will be forwarded to Dave Null.
Damn, I didn't get my other option either: orienteering.info. So, now I don't really know what domain I should use. Arrrgh.
To address the example: CSS is entirely Håkon Wium Lie's baby, and I know him, and he's a really good guy. He is now CTO of Opera, but joined because he believed that Opera is needed to maintain the diversity in browsers. He is a firm believer in the necessity of open standards, and I'm sure nothing will get in the way of that.