The anti-copyright crowd and the anti-MSIE crowd are pretty much one in the same. A Venn diagram of the two would probably look like a basketball in a red/green stereoscopic photo. Where's the problem? People that don't/won't use IE are likely never to transact any business with the Copyright Office, other than to deluge them with comments about how if they ever were to file for Copyright protection, they would have to *gasp* use a technology that is readily available? Unbelievable.
Student: Why are the bars horizontal on the left and vertical on the right?
Master: One eye sees truth, one eye sees falsehood.
Student: Which eye is correct?
Master: Neither.
This is a smart move, on Sun's behalf. Considering the impending release of OpenSolaris, it's important for them to foster more community involvement. What really makes me curious is the choice of NetBSD. Theo DeRaadt (OpenBSD) is (correct me if I'm wrong) a big Sun hardware nut. Nobody that knows better (and holds no other prejudice towards Theo) would accuse him of being a poor coder. I guess maybe Sun thinks that already going to be an OpenSolaris contributor? Or maybe there's been some past heated discussions between he and Sun?
I think FreeBSD may not have been the choice for two reasons: 1) they have relatively new support for Sparcs; 2) they have a more Commercial Appearance than Open or Net.
For you few that think that Sun is going out of business, you should read Yahoo finance once in a while; Sun is apparently quietly positioning themselves to go private (despite McNealy's flimsy denial); this means that, essentially, they have the cash reserves to buy back a significant portion of the outstanding stock. Of course, this all may fall to the ground, but they had a 6% jump on the rumor, which indicates a number of people thought this plausable. The firm that is supposedly helping them do this made major news when they helped Seagate? do the same thing a while back.
Sun has quietly been rebuilding themselves for a while - the acquisition of Cobalt to put them back into the PC architecture; the purchase and subsequent open-sourcing of their grid platform; the purchase and subsequent open-sourcing of OpenOffice; the purchase of NetBeans IDE and the integration of same with the previously-named Forte compiler suite. The forth-coming OpenSolaris. OK, I disagree with the Java-branded Gnome desktop (KDE would have been my preference), but it still beats the hell out of CDE or OpenLook.
I definitely feel something brewing at Sun, something really good. I've even bet money on it by purchasing a block of SUNW. I believe they are going to try to go where Apple hasn't and where MS doesn't want them - straight to the homes of millions.
Obviously, TFA is a guerilla advertising campaign for Parks Sabers. I'm curious, though, as to how much this campaign cost. Two things are certain facts:
Parks Sabers has a successful campaign, judging from the/. effect that is starting to become apparent to visitors
/. was the correct demographic to drop this marketing on: mostly single young men with disposable income and an overwhelming love for Star Wars crap.
Since the Parks site claims no affiliation with Lucas and the official Star Wars marketing outlets, I'm wondering how long before he gets slapped with a cease-and-desist.
The nice thing about my.profile is this: rather than placing your suggestions in all the little dotfiles, I instead have a single file which is easy to scp/ftp/cut+paste. Who wants to fuck around with copying a whole crapload of dotfiles onto every box they use? I log into a new box and scp my.profile. 99.99999% of the time, I never have to touch it again. I have tailorings for Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP/UX, and Cygwin.
To be fair, I typically use GNU tools on those OS's which are not fortunate enough (unlike BSD) to have decent versions of their own tools. This tends to streamline my aliasing quite a bit.
You must be a newb or have never used other than Linux; vim can't ALWAYS detect the right thing to do; try using color syntax highlighting on a Solaris console w/o writing a termcap entry.
pgrep is a fairly new addition to FreeBSD; it's only been in Solaris since 7; those are my two most frequently used OSs, with various Linux flavors coming third. psg='ps (-ax|-ef)|grep' is a more convenient way to do things. Having a single syntax which you always use on EVERY box really makes life easier.
Give me an hour to explain my entire.profile, I'll come up with at least a dozen other frequently used programs which make more sense to configure using aliases than in dotfiles (especially considering that there are so many of the little fuckers).
Parent is asking about ways to make newb's life easier - having to know every little dotfile you have to add/change to make your day more productive is beyond out of control. A simple, single.profile like mine can last for years without revision, and is easy to transport. The only fault I have in my previous post is I didn't say explicitly that aliasing is easier/more portable than dotfiles, b/c I thought that was just common sense. Stupid me.
But, since we're all being assholes, today, I was wondering if you ever made an original post, or if everything you say is just sniping at other people because they don't do things exactly the way you want. That's a typical Linux apologist for you. Seriously, look at your post history. You really are just a giant penis-shaped boy. You probably use emacs, too.
if [ "X${TERM}" == "Xxterm" ]; then
alias -x vi='vim -T xterm-color'
alias -x cd='Xcd'
Xcd()
{
if [ $# -ne 0 ]; then
'cd' "$@"
else
'cd'
fi
echo "^[]0;${HOST}:${PWD}^G"
}
Xcd.
fi
I never finished the Xcd() function to perfection, but it generally does what I want. Note that the ^[ and ^G are binary, 0x1b (ESC) and 0x07 (BEL).
Yes, obviously the answer to EVERY problem about the Internet is more laws on the books. The scary thing is, with things like SOX, we spend more money and time on bureaucracy than fostering an environment which would preclude the need for SOX in the first place. Instead of criminalizing bad conduct, why doesn't the government try to encourage could conduct by, say, granting tax relief for companies that are fully SOX compliant instead of prosecuting executives that fail to make this happen. That would encourage good behavior far better than turning people off to being in business in the first place.
Think about it - let's say you're Bill Gates or Scott McNealy; would you really want to be in a position where failure to do your job correctly would result in jail time? SOX is stupid for exactly this reason.
Now, translate that to the internet. You are a webmaster, and because you didn't install NT4SP26 on your IIS farm, you could face 20 years in jail. Utter bullshit. Let's kill this idea before it gets any momentum!
Aside from the "minor," bugs with OOo that this thread is bringing to light, there is another serious consideration as far as interoperability and cross-office compatibility: Visual Basic for Applications (VBA).
Before anyone considers a migration from MSO to OOo, you must consider your existing use of VBA; if none at all, no problem. On the other hand, if you have administration using VBA to manage accounting information, and teachers using VBA to manage grades, and students using VBA as part of their curriculum, then OOo is definitely going to be a more expensive solution, at least in the short term.
On the flip side, VBA is one of the major featu^H^H^H^H^Hsecurity concerns; you could try to take that angle if you are using VBA extensively.
(1) Why would spammers voluntarly reduce the size of the audience they reach out to when not legally enforced?
Because even though spamming is lower-cost advertising compared to traditional marketing channels, there is still a per-email cost associated; there is no point in advertising to someone who is not interested, if it is costing money. See also Targeted Marketing and One-to-one Marketing.
(2) The site is likely a dupe and serves the opposite purpose: to let spammers know about your e-mail and, more importantly, that it's being actively used.
Undoubtedly, there are total jerkwads who do this. If you check applicable law, this practice is probably illegal. The transfer of that information (your request that they and/or their affiliates/partners/whatever never ever mail you again) to any other party is illegal, "for any purpose other than compliance with this Act or other provision of law." Sure, a criminal is a criminal, and no law will stop that, but since CAN-SPAM passed, you're probably better off "opting out," than blocking or filtering. The flip side of that is that the Feds have given you a method of relief; assuming that this disreputable entity registered your request to be removed and transfered that information to another party (who, obviously, emailed you), you could seek damages from both parties.
Personally, I want to meet the idiot that decided motion sensors on toilets (not urinals, mind you, but toilets) was a good idea. Try and take a shit - next thing you know, you're getting a ball-wash. It's extremely annoying, not to mention a tad cold.
TFA is decidedly one-sided. By looking at Mumma's *own* websites, this is a pretty clear-cut case of entrapment by Mumma.
For example, head over to SueASpammer, and you will see right off the bat he calls for people to
set a trap
sue
Reading a little further, he implies that people should falsify their identity when OPTING IN TO AN EMAIL LIST, and then later using that as leverage (e.g. say "Who the hell is Joe Blow? My name is John Public). I'd have to look into any applicable law, but in my dictionary, that constitutes fraud.
Number three, if you read Omega's suit, they allege that Mumma did not comply with the provided opt-out procedure, but instead called them and almost immediately started threatening them. Mumma allegedly would not provide his information so that they might comply with his "request" to be removed. Instead, he was belligerent, insulting, and threatening. This may not be illegal, but it is certainly in poor taste and is a mark against him. Lawyers and judges don't want to deal with fanatics, for the most part - they want to deal with reasonable people that have a legitimate claim.
Number four, since Mumma's request for removal was NOT VALID via his own stupid actions, and since he allegedly SIGNED UP for this "spam," via indirect admission at SueASpammer.com procedures, this is not a valid claim under CAN-SPAM. Furthermore, this also invalidates Mumma's claim under Oklahoma law, see 776.5.3 at SpamLaws OK.
I would not at all be surprised to see Omega et al. come out of this not only unscathed, but smelling like a rose.
Although he would disagree that he is a "tax evader," you should check out this guy Larken Rose, recently under endictment, who qualifies for that title about as much as anyone possibly can. Much interesting reading, there, if you want to know about the inner workings of the IRS and tax laws.
It seems clear to me after I read the article that the FEC will look at bloggers as press. In the eyes of the Constitution, there is no delineation between press and individual. Extending that logic via the FEC to the Internet, a blogger is every bit as much a press entity as the NYT, Tom Brokaw, or Reuters. Considering especially that there are still thousands of freelance reports that sell their content to these large organizations, and individual IS the press. Also, take into account that the Internet, as the Great Equalizer, affords an individual the same opportunity to reach an audience of millions as these large corporations. The only difference is the revenue side, in which bloggers present their information (generally speaking) for free. Even that is a fallacy, in a sense, because of the large number of bloggers with Google ads or Amazon affiliations or other revenue-producing content interspersed in their blogs.
The more important question is whether or not the FEC will count the contribution in terms of Money Raised or Money Spent. This is sure to get ugly very fast.
Actually, SCOTUS already killed the First Amendment with respect to political speech, when they upheld the BCRA (aka McCain/Feingold, Campaign Finance Reform) back in 2003. But don't take my word for it. Here is part of the opinion from Justice Kennedy:
Although today's opinion does not expressly strip the press of First Amendment protection,
there is no principal of law or logic that would prevent the application of the Court's reasoning in
that setting. The press now operates at the whim of Congress.
In other words, we're screwed; Congress gave the FEC juris diction over these matters back in 1974, and
SCOTUS says by 5 to 4 that almost everything about McCain/Feingold is kosher.
As you said, "perhaps it's best to leave the journalism to the professionals."
(evil grin) Does anyone else feel that the interview read like Arthur "Two Sheds" Jackson?
To the interviewer: it's a good strategy to butter up your subject and take a gradual incline to the "hard questions." A valiant effort, but you need a little more practice on your incline; the three or so questions that PR answered were a little out there - it was clear from these questions that you had an agenda you were trying to further, and the Business wanted no part of that. I don't fault them at all for not answering. Tact - look it up.
I notice that you consider yourself an old-time HP/UX user. If that was a preference of yours, you will probably get adjusted to the BSD's very easily: IIRC, HP/UX up until and including 10.x was very heavily BSD. I still get a kick out of firing up my Apollo 710 and seeing how different that environment is from Solaris.
Net/Open/Free all have great install programs, though Free is a little more in-depth about everything that you can do during the install process. Net and Open make it very easy to floppy- or netboot and install the entire OS over FTP. This is also an option with Free, but the mirrors get slogged down. So, I recommend you download the ISO; you only really need disc 1.
Also, I would recommend the 5.3-RELEASE of Free over the 4.11-RELEASE. The 5 series releases have been pretty great and very stable for the vast majority of uses. 5 series Free represents what is apparently a new (or just highly-refined) philosophy on the older hierarchy and RC architecture, and from that perspective is far easier to administer. Also, devfs is very handy (not sure if any of this stuff made it into the 4.x series, as I jumped ship when 5.0 released).
Okay, okay... I want all the Kerry supporters to move to the west side of the Mississippi, and all the Bush supporters to the east. Minor candidates can have their choice of Puerto Rico, Hawaii, or Alaska. Once you've selected your geographic region, please refrain from changing your mind or going back to your home state.
Now, wait for the census.
See? Completely accurate voting, and everyone is happy; the blues who want to go to Canada now have their own country, the reds who are tired of hearing the blues cry are now free of them, and the minor candidates each get their own territory to run, as well.
I read a great deal of the Department of Energy report on Kyoto. Something in particular that jumped out at me is the sheer cost of our implementing technology to comply with Kyoto. First to note is the best-case, most-compliant price tag; it's around 1.8 trillion dollars over the next 7-8 years. That doesn't take into account job losses/creations/displacements or other economic factors surrounding the implementation - like the upward change in oil and coal prices for the consumer market; DoE was unable to quantify these changes other than to say that they would trend upward.
Something else that is very important is that our energy will have to shift to a more nuclear approach, which is great and all, but we are a nation full of NIMBYs; the pro-Kyoto Americans need to realize that in accepting Kyoto, they are tacitly approving 60 or more nuclear power plants to be built and online in the next 8 years. Since the support for Kyoto is (at least on/.) a very environmentalist stance, I find this to be a little bit in conflict.
Clinton had no chance of winning again because the Constitution limits presidents to two full terms, not because he was unpopular or was impeached. There was, actually, an undercurrent at the time suggesting that the Constitution be amended to allow him to try for a third term.
Whether or not anyone had any business asking him the question is a moot point, since he waived executive privilege to answer the question; he chose to answer it, when he would have been his right not to do so. I was never a Clinton fan, but I think he really set a very bad precedent by not claiming executive privilege.
So, really, you just Hate Bush because somebody is telling you that you should, similar to how you like Clinton because somebody told you that you should. You have no solid arguments for either case, and you certainly haven't laid out any reason why anyone should vote for Kerry (rather than against Bush).
That's really funny; the Michael Moore wannabe gets a +3 insightful. We DO KNOW that Clinton lied to us, because he admitted to perjuring himself under oath (is that redundant?). Apparently, there IS an acceptable excuse for lying, and it relies on the definition of the word "is". So, guess what happened? The guy who was charged with upholding and defending our laws, who swore that he would do exactly that, who then got caught breaking the law, was given a free pass. That's right - he GOT AWAY WITH IT. And he enjoyed high approval ratings after that, too. After all, it was only a blowjob, it's not like it was an invasion of a country. Little white lies don't really count.
If anything, you need to measure Bush by his ability to get away with these alleged lies. He sure has Clinton beat from that perspective. From a legal stance, Bush is squeaky-clean. Remember that it was Congress that essentially forfeited the Constitution when they subjugated their war declaration power to Bush. Which is really quite interesting, considering the same bunch still haven't even considered a number of Bush's Judicial nominations, other than to stonewall them into oblivion.
Before your non-eligible ass starts making accusations (because those are just wild accusations, there's no evidence that Bush lied to us unless you consider that Kerry also lied to us about the same issues), try reading a little history; you don't have to go back that far. Clinton is the guy who ALREADY made lying to the People an acceptable feat. Everything after that must be cast in his mold.
Forgetting all the Clinton-gates, you have to go way, way back to Bush Sr. to get to the "Read My Lips," lie. You could go back even further to Reagan's lies about arming Iran and Iraq at the same time. Of course, that policy extended right out of the Carter administration, who started the policy of arming "friendlies," you know, Freedom Fighters (that is a very pliable term; some of them fight for freedom, some of them fight against freedom; the name works either way). Carter, the guy who lied about getting our hostages back from Freedom Fighters in Iran. Ford wasn't around long enough to really lie about anything, but Nixon sure was; then again, it was never proven that he lied about anything, even though he was found to be complicit in the entire Watergate scandal and numerous other dubious extra-curricular political games. And that doesn't even matter because we'll probably never know who Deep Throat was, and Ford pardoned Nixon in advance, just in case. Johnson lied about getting us out of Vietnam, you know, the war^H^H^Hpolice action HE started. Kennedy caused the Cuban Missile Crisis through his Bay of Pigs failure; that's right, the guy that is usually credited with averting nuclear war was the reason it needed to be averted in the first place! All presidents suck. Get over it.
Consider this one final thought on lying: of all the shitty men I named above, Kerry is the only one who is constantly in danger of lying; he's been on every side of every issue, so it's going to be very hard for him not to lie to somebody.
As a funny aside, I watched a Kerry ad this evening in which Kerry spoke through the whole ad, to camera, and then said "I'm John Kerry, and I approved this message." Well, I would hope so, Senator; you just delivered it! Damn the FEC, anyways, but it makes you wonder if we should always expect Kerry (assuming he is/(s|)elected/) to follow up with IATM; otherwise, he might not hold that position for long.
Troll much? It's a good point about platform-bashing between, say, coworkers or classmates. You're talking about B2B criticism among competitors, however - it's part of the Free Market System. So, you don't want to try NetBeans (again) because their leader criticized the hype and marketing practices of Eclipse? So, what? Tim Boudreau was responding to the same thing that you're complaining about; bashing from the other side. And, in his case/from his perspective, it was warranted (re: the three questions about Eclipse and competition that were asked of him by the interviewer).
You're too quick to jump on the hate-this-or-that bandwagon because you are sensitive to attacks on your intelligence. RTFA! The majority of it speaks to the strengths and features of NetBeans, not the weaknesses of the competition. The attack on your intelligence is actually a back-handed compliment about IBM's marketing; unless you are in IBM's marketing division, I don't think it applies to you. Besides, those comments follow a self-deprecation which acknowledges that NetBeans was a POS. I see no evidence in this article of anything remotely criticizing you or your IDE. Get a life, grow some skin.
Disclaimer: for the little bit of Java I do write, I use gvim; I have used NetBeans before, and actually just downloaded the latest version to give it a shot. I'm not a NetBeans lover, however, and I would have said the same thing if the situation was reversed.
Here's a real good reason for strictist privacy concerning individual and family medical records - with this kind of technology, not only is "personalized medicine," a possibility, but also "personalized illness." Imagine what you could do with a virus that *only* afflicted one person. It's kinda scary.
Slashdot Mirror
The anti-copyright crowd and the anti-MSIE crowd are pretty much one in the same. A Venn diagram of the two would probably look like a basketball in a red/green stereoscopic photo. Where's the problem? People that don't/won't use IE are likely never to transact any business with the Copyright Office, other than to deluge them with comments about how if they ever were to file for Copyright protection, they would have to *gasp* use a technology that is readily available? Unbelievable.
Student: Why are the bars horizontal on the left and vertical on the right?
Master: One eye sees truth, one eye sees falsehood.
Student: Which eye is correct?
Master: Neither.
Two chemistry majors walk into a bar. The bartender says to the first, "What can I get for you?"
"H2O."
"And you," asks the bartender?
"I'll have an H20, too."
The second guy died.
This is a smart move, on Sun's behalf. Considering the impending release of OpenSolaris, it's important for them to foster more community involvement. What really makes me curious is the choice of NetBSD. Theo DeRaadt (OpenBSD) is (correct me if I'm wrong) a big Sun hardware nut. Nobody that knows better (and holds no other prejudice towards Theo) would accuse him of being a poor coder. I guess maybe Sun thinks that already going to be an OpenSolaris contributor? Or maybe there's been some past heated discussions between he and Sun?
I think FreeBSD may not have been the choice for two reasons: 1) they have relatively new support for Sparcs; 2) they have a more Commercial Appearance than Open or Net.
For you few that think that Sun is going out of business, you should read Yahoo finance once in a while; Sun is apparently quietly positioning themselves to go private (despite McNealy's flimsy denial); this means that, essentially, they have the cash reserves to buy back a significant portion of the outstanding stock. Of course, this all may fall to the ground, but they had a 6% jump on the rumor, which indicates a number of people thought this plausable. The firm that is supposedly helping them do this made major news when they helped Seagate? do the same thing a while back.
Sun has quietly been rebuilding themselves for a while - the acquisition of Cobalt to put them back into the PC architecture; the purchase and subsequent open-sourcing of their grid platform; the purchase and subsequent open-sourcing of OpenOffice; the purchase of NetBeans IDE and the integration of same with the previously-named Forte compiler suite. The forth-coming OpenSolaris. OK, I disagree with the Java-branded Gnome desktop (KDE would have been my preference), but it still beats the hell out of CDE or OpenLook.
I definitely feel something brewing at Sun, something really good. I've even bet money on it by purchasing a block of SUNW. I believe they are going to try to go where Apple hasn't and where MS doesn't want them - straight to the homes of millions.
Since the Parks site claims no affiliation with Lucas and the official Star Wars marketing outlets, I'm wondering how long before he gets slapped with a cease-and-desist.
The nice thing about my .profile is this: rather than placing your suggestions in all the little dotfiles, I instead have a single file which is easy to scp/ftp/cut+paste. Who wants to fuck around with copying a whole crapload of dotfiles onto every box they use? I log into a new box and scp my .profile. 99.99999% of the time, I never have to touch it again. I have tailorings for Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, AIX, HP/UX, and Cygwin.
To be fair, I typically use GNU tools on those OS's which are not fortunate enough (unlike BSD) to have decent versions of their own tools. This tends to streamline my aliasing quite a bit.
You must be a newb or have never used other than Linux; vim can't ALWAYS detect the right thing to do; try using color syntax highlighting on a Solaris console w/o writing a termcap entry.
pgrep is a fairly new addition to FreeBSD; it's only been in Solaris since 7; those are my two most frequently used OSs, with various Linux flavors coming third. psg='ps (-ax|-ef)|grep' is a more convenient way to do things. Having a single syntax which you always use on EVERY box really makes life easier.
Give me an hour to explain my entire .profile, I'll come up with at least a dozen other frequently used programs which make more sense to configure using aliases than in dotfiles (especially considering that there are so many of the little fuckers).
Parent is asking about ways to make newb's life easier - having to know every little dotfile you have to add/change to make your day more productive is beyond out of control. A simple, single .profile like mine can last for years without revision, and is easy to transport. The only fault I have in my previous post is I didn't say explicitly that aliasing is easier/more portable than dotfiles, b/c I thought that was just common sense. Stupid me.
But, since we're all being assholes, today, I was wondering if you ever made an original post, or if everything you say is just sniping at other people because they don't do things exactly the way you want. That's a typical Linux apologist for you. Seriously, look at your post history. You really are just a giant penis-shaped boy. You probably use emacs, too.
Fuck off and die.
- alias -x xterm='xterm -ls -sb -rv'
- alias -x psg='ps ax | grep'
- alias -x bye='clear;exit'
- alias -x ssh='ssh -X'
- HOST=`hostname -s`
- if [ "X${TERM}" == "Xxterm" ]; then
.
I never finished the Xcd() function to perfection, but it generally does what I want. Note that the ^[ and ^G are binary, 0x1b (ESC) and 0x07 (BEL).alias -x vi='vim -T xterm-color' alias -x cd='Xcd'
Xcd()
{
if [ $# -ne 0 ]; then
'cd' "$@"
else
'cd'
fi
echo " ^[ ]0;${HOST}:${PWD} ^G "
}
Xcd
fi
Yes, obviously the answer to EVERY problem about the Internet is more laws on the books. The scary thing is, with things like SOX, we spend more money and time on bureaucracy than fostering an environment which would preclude the need for SOX in the first place. Instead of criminalizing bad conduct, why doesn't the government try to encourage could conduct by, say, granting tax relief for companies that are fully SOX compliant instead of prosecuting executives that fail to make this happen. That would encourage good behavior far better than turning people off to being in business in the first place.
Think about it - let's say you're Bill Gates or Scott McNealy; would you really want to be in a position where failure to do your job correctly would result in jail time? SOX is stupid for exactly this reason.
Now, translate that to the internet. You are a webmaster, and because you didn't install NT4SP26 on your IIS farm, you could face 20 years in jail. Utter bullshit. Let's kill this idea before it gets any momentum!
Aside from the "minor," bugs with OOo that this thread is bringing to light, there is another serious consideration as far as interoperability and cross-office compatibility: Visual Basic for Applications (VBA).
Before anyone considers a migration from MSO to OOo, you must consider your existing use of VBA; if none at all, no problem. On the other hand, if you have administration using VBA to manage accounting information, and teachers using VBA to manage grades, and students using VBA as part of their curriculum, then OOo is definitely going to be a more expensive solution, at least in the short term.
On the flip side, VBA is one of the major featu^H^H^H^H^Hsecurity concerns; you could try to take that angle if you are using VBA extensively.
Think last. Geek shop. Foo.
(1) Why would spammers voluntarly reduce the size of the audience they reach out to when not legally enforced?
Because even though spamming is lower-cost advertising compared to traditional marketing channels, there is still a per-email cost associated; there is no point in advertising to someone who is not interested, if it is costing money. See also Targeted Marketing and One-to-one Marketing.
(2) The site is likely a dupe and serves the opposite purpose: to let spammers know about your e-mail and, more importantly, that it's being actively used.
Undoubtedly, there are total jerkwads who do this. If you check applicable law, this practice is probably illegal. The transfer of that information (your request that they and/or their affiliates/partners/whatever never ever mail you again) to any other party is illegal, "for any purpose other than compliance with this Act or other provision of law." Sure, a criminal is a criminal, and no law will stop that, but since CAN-SPAM passed, you're probably better off "opting out," than blocking or filtering. The flip side of that is that the Feds have given you a method of relief; assuming that this disreputable entity registered your request to be removed and transfered that information to another party (who, obviously, emailed you), you could seek damages from both parties.
Personally, I want to meet the idiot that decided motion sensors on toilets (not urinals, mind you, but toilets) was a good idea. Try and take a shit - next thing you know, you're getting a ball-wash. It's extremely annoying, not to mention a tad cold.
For example, head over to SueASpammer, and you will see right off the bat he calls for people to
Reading a little further, he implies that people should falsify their identity when OPTING IN TO AN EMAIL LIST, and then later using that as leverage (e.g. say "Who the hell is Joe Blow? My name is John Public). I'd have to look into any applicable law, but in my dictionary, that constitutes fraud.
Number three, if you read Omega's suit, they allege that Mumma did not comply with the provided opt-out procedure, but instead called them and almost immediately started threatening them. Mumma allegedly would not provide his information so that they might comply with his "request" to be removed. Instead, he was belligerent, insulting, and threatening. This may not be illegal, but it is certainly in poor taste and is a mark against him. Lawyers and judges don't want to deal with fanatics, for the most part - they want to deal with reasonable people that have a legitimate claim.
Number four, since Mumma's request for removal was NOT VALID via his own stupid actions, and since he allegedly SIGNED UP for this "spam," via indirect admission at SueASpammer.com procedures, this is not a valid claim under CAN-SPAM. Furthermore, this also invalidates Mumma's claim under Oklahoma law, see 776.5.3 at SpamLaws OK.
I would not at all be surprised to see Omega et al. come out of this not only unscathed, but smelling like a rose.
Will I need to run an IPX stack to play online?
Although he would disagree that he is a "tax evader," you should check out this guy Larken Rose, recently under endictment, who qualifies for that title about as much as anyone possibly can. Much interesting reading, there, if you want to know about the inner workings of the IRS and tax laws.
The more important question is whether or not the FEC will count the contribution in terms of Money Raised or Money Spent. This is sure to get ugly very fast.
Actually, SCOTUS already killed the First Amendment with respect to political speech, when they upheld the BCRA (aka McCain/Feingold, Campaign Finance Reform) back in 2003. But don't take my word for it. Here is part of the opinion from Justice Kennedy:
In other words, we're screwed; Congress gave the FEC juris diction over these matters back in 1974, and SCOTUS says by 5 to 4 that almost everything about McCain/Feingold is kosher.
As you said, "perhaps it's best to leave the journalism to the professionals."
(evil grin) Does anyone else feel that the interview read like Arthur "Two Sheds" Jackson?
To the interviewer: it's a good strategy to butter up your subject and take a gradual incline to the "hard questions." A valiant effort, but you need a little more practice on your incline; the three or so questions that PR answered were a little out there - it was clear from these questions that you had an agenda you were trying to further, and the Business wanted no part of that. I don't fault them at all for not answering. Tact - look it up.
I notice that you consider yourself an old-time HP/UX user. If that was a preference of yours, you will probably get adjusted to the BSD's very easily: IIRC, HP/UX up until and including 10.x was very heavily BSD. I still get a kick out of firing up my Apollo 710 and seeing how different that environment is from Solaris.
Net/Open/Free all have great install programs, though Free is a little more in-depth about everything that you can do during the install process. Net and Open make it very easy to floppy- or netboot and install the entire OS over FTP. This is also an option with Free, but the mirrors get slogged down. So, I recommend you download the ISO; you only really need disc 1.
Also, I would recommend the 5.3-RELEASE of Free over the 4.11-RELEASE. The 5 series releases have been pretty great and very stable for the vast majority of uses. 5 series Free represents what is apparently a new (or just highly-refined) philosophy on the older hierarchy and RC architecture, and from that perspective is far easier to administer. Also, devfs is very handy (not sure if any of this stuff made it into the 4.x series, as I jumped ship when 5.0 released).
Okay, okay... I want all the Kerry supporters to move to the west side of the Mississippi, and all the Bush supporters to the east. Minor candidates can have their choice of Puerto Rico, Hawaii, or Alaska. Once you've selected your geographic region, please refrain from changing your mind or going back to your home state.
Now, wait for the census.
See? Completely accurate voting, and everyone is happy; the blues who want to go to Canada now have their own country, the reds who are tired of hearing the blues cry are now free of them, and the minor candidates each get their own territory to run, as well.
I read a great deal of the Department of Energy report on Kyoto. Something in particular that jumped out at me is the sheer cost of our implementing technology to comply with Kyoto. First to note is the best-case, most-compliant price tag; it's around 1.8 trillion dollars over the next 7-8 years. That doesn't take into account job losses/creations/displacements or other economic factors surrounding the implementation - like the upward change in oil and coal prices for the consumer market; DoE was unable to quantify these changes other than to say that they would trend upward.
Something else that is very important is that our energy will have to shift to a more nuclear approach, which is great and all, but we are a nation full of NIMBYs; the pro-Kyoto Americans need to realize that in accepting Kyoto, they are tacitly approving 60 or more nuclear power plants to be built and online in the next 8 years. Since the support for Kyoto is (at least on /.) a very environmentalist stance, I find this to be a little bit in conflict.
Clinton had no chance of winning again because the Constitution limits presidents to two full terms, not because he was unpopular or was impeached. There was, actually, an undercurrent at the time suggesting that the Constitution be amended to allow him to try for a third term.
Whether or not anyone had any business asking him the question is a moot point, since he waived executive privilege to answer the question; he chose to answer it, when he would have been his right not to do so. I was never a Clinton fan, but I think he really set a very bad precedent by not claiming executive privilege.
So, really, you just Hate Bush because somebody is telling you that you should, similar to how you like Clinton because somebody told you that you should. You have no solid arguments for either case, and you certainly haven't laid out any reason why anyone should vote for Kerry (rather than against Bush).
I'm glad that you are not eligible to vote.
I'm bsdbigot, and I approved this message.
That's really funny; the Michael Moore wannabe gets a +3 insightful. We DO KNOW that Clinton lied to us, because he admitted to perjuring himself under oath (is that redundant?). Apparently, there IS an acceptable excuse for lying, and it relies on the definition of the word "is". So, guess what happened? The guy who was charged with upholding and defending our laws, who swore that he would do exactly that, who then got caught breaking the law, was given a free pass. That's right - he GOT AWAY WITH IT. And he enjoyed high approval ratings after that, too. After all, it was only a blowjob, it's not like it was an invasion of a country. Little white lies don't really count.
If anything, you need to measure Bush by his ability to get away with these alleged lies. He sure has Clinton beat from that perspective. From a legal stance, Bush is squeaky-clean. Remember that it was Congress that essentially forfeited the Constitution when they subjugated their war declaration power to Bush. Which is really quite interesting, considering the same bunch still haven't even considered a number of Bush's Judicial nominations, other than to stonewall them into oblivion.
Before your non-eligible ass starts making accusations (because those are just wild accusations, there's no evidence that Bush lied to us unless you consider that Kerry also lied to us about the same issues), try reading a little history; you don't have to go back that far. Clinton is the guy who ALREADY made lying to the People an acceptable feat. Everything after that must be cast in his mold.
Forgetting all the Clinton-gates, you have to go way, way back to Bush Sr. to get to the "Read My Lips," lie. You could go back even further to Reagan's lies about arming Iran and Iraq at the same time. Of course, that policy extended right out of the Carter administration, who started the policy of arming "friendlies," you know, Freedom Fighters (that is a very pliable term; some of them fight for freedom, some of them fight against freedom; the name works either way). Carter, the guy who lied about getting our hostages back from Freedom Fighters in Iran. Ford wasn't around long enough to really lie about anything, but Nixon sure was; then again, it was never proven that he lied about anything, even though he was found to be complicit in the entire Watergate scandal and numerous other dubious extra-curricular political games. And that doesn't even matter because we'll probably never know who Deep Throat was, and Ford pardoned Nixon in advance, just in case. Johnson lied about getting us out of Vietnam, you know, the war^H^H^Hpolice action HE started. Kennedy caused the Cuban Missile Crisis through his Bay of Pigs failure; that's right, the guy that is usually credited with averting nuclear war was the reason it needed to be averted in the first place! All presidents suck. Get over it.
Consider this one final thought on lying: of all the shitty men I named above, Kerry is the only one who is constantly in danger of lying; he's been on every side of every issue, so it's going to be very hard for him not to lie to somebody.
As a funny aside, I watched a Kerry ad this evening in which Kerry spoke through the whole ad, to camera, and then said "I'm John Kerry, and I approved this message." Well, I would hope so, Senator; you just delivered it! Damn the FEC, anyways, but it makes you wonder if we should always expect Kerry (assuming he is /(s|)elected/) to follow up with IATM; otherwise, he might not hold that position for long.
I'm bsdbigot, and I approved this message.
Troll much? It's a good point about platform-bashing between, say, coworkers or classmates. You're talking about B2B criticism among competitors, however - it's part of the Free Market System. So, you don't want to try NetBeans (again) because their leader criticized the hype and marketing practices of Eclipse? So, what? Tim Boudreau was responding to the same thing that you're complaining about; bashing from the other side. And, in his case/from his perspective, it was warranted (re: the three questions about Eclipse and competition that were asked of him by the interviewer).
You're too quick to jump on the hate-this-or-that bandwagon because you are sensitive to attacks on your intelligence. RTFA! The majority of it speaks to the strengths and features of NetBeans, not the weaknesses of the competition. The attack on your intelligence is actually a back-handed compliment about IBM's marketing; unless you are in IBM's marketing division, I don't think it applies to you. Besides, those comments follow a self-deprecation which acknowledges that NetBeans was a POS. I see no evidence in this article of anything remotely criticizing you or your IDE. Get a life, grow some skin.
Disclaimer: for the little bit of Java I do write, I use gvim; I have used NetBeans before, and actually just downloaded the latest version to give it a shot. I'm not a NetBeans lover, however, and I would have said the same thing if the situation was reversed.
Here's a real good reason for strictist privacy concerning individual and family medical records - with this kind of technology, not only is "personalized medicine," a possibility, but also "personalized illness." Imagine what you could do with a virus that *only* afflicted one person. It's kinda scary.