That's a nice thing about the Internet, you can post links to support your arguement or add additional information.
Just to be complete was this your article, I think that you will find the complete publication more informative than the story based on the Press Release. I did a quick read of the material, and while the publication is really slick they don't do any footnoting, nor do they seem to tell you specificly where they got the figures or what those figures include and exclude (I might have missed it, I'll read the rest later). I wonder if it includes personal giving, or is some kind of 'net' figure (elimating say the amount payed to US farmers for grain). In fairness there is a list of unqualified references at the bottom of the report, which makes fact checking only marginally easier. Also, I find it interesting that they harp on the percentages, in the middle of the paper they say that the best way to improve the encomomy is an increase of the exports from the country (but that doesn't show up in the press report or the executive summary. Kinda like the old saying "give a man a fish...teach him to fish...". In that case you can consider our trade deficit as part of the aid!
All the whining aside, those poor people need our help today. Since you seem to be keeping track, right now, we (the U.S.) lead Japan by 5 million, Germany by more than $32 million, and that is jut what the Feds are putting up.
RMPYFM (Read My Post You !@#$@#$@# Moron) I clearly said "misusing a tradegy for you own purposes in a manner that is worthy of a Bush staffer". Apparently, you are yet another stupid jerk clearly reading what you want to read in order to post your otherwise off topic comment. Perhaps you should apply for one of the openings in the Bush Whitehouse, you might have idealogical differences, but you sure do have the ability to read into a situation exactly what you want.
You might also hold some of the hate that I have for the Bush administration (of course your probably just a regular Troll as your name implies), but your comment serves 'our' cause no good. Comparing bush to a chimp (as your link does) may be funny the first couple of times you see it, but it doesn't support any argument.
I doubt that the outside orgs will have anything to do with the troubleshooting process.
I work on web based applications which are used by client companies every day, and my company uses web based applications from other vendors. During the acceptance phase, we often hear comments like, this doesn't' look right, blah, blah, blah.
The contract which are created between us and our client companies are often very specific about 'supported browsers', using a different browser would make us or them in violation of that agreement.
I doubt if you have ever worked in or used a corporate help desk, but they tend to be very specific about what software/configurations they are willing to support. For example, my company still uses Office '97 as the installed standard, but we pay for the latest version(I am told that it's because of different version of Access). I use a much newer version on my desktop, but I know that if there is a problem, it's likely that they will force me to downgrade before helping me fix it.
Also many companies are out sourcing IT support to specialized companies.
Personally, I use Firefox as my main browser even at work, but there is a few work related sites which I need to use IE. I don't like it, but it's not my choice. Personally, I check all of my interfaces in both IE (the corporate standard) and Firefox (the soon to be Internet standard), and I encourage 'the powers that be' to be inclusive of Firefox, when designing the browser standards.
[the help desk]
would probably only hear good things.
You don't have to go any farther than Slashdot to see a site that doesn't render 'correctly' in Firefox. Yes, I do know th issues and even the patches, but for the average user this would represent a help desk call, and many wouldn't be very nice no matter who is responsible to field it.
As you should be, you are clearly distorting the facts, and misusing a tradegy for you own purposes in a manner that is worthy of a Bush staffer. $35 million dollars is just in discressionary funds, Congress will meet shorty to approve more money from our Federal government, and of course this doesn't include private charity.
I dislike bush more than most, but you 'sir' are living proof that being 'left' doesn't make you 'right'.
That's a good idea for a single user, or small close knit group. If you have a large group, sooner or later someone will 'let the cat out of the bag' and tell these outside orgs that you'all are using firefox; Then they'll blame any problems on the 'bad browser' and refuse to help until you start using the 'right browser'.
Personally, I would start my solution using the IEAK (last time I looked it was free from Microsoft),which would allow a very customized IE. Also using automatic updates (if XP), or force users to use a startup script, which checks a network share for an update script.
Lastly (just to be complete), I'd use a strong firwall (duh), with a proxy server to restrict sites. Which is pretty good advice for any group.
even better, I did a search on the beta msn site for 'NeverEverNoSanity WebWorm generation', the best that I got as a search result was 20 (well the first couple of pages), but the site read 11 when I went to it, I suppose that the worm is writing over it's own defacement.
Ok, how do I solve that yet give the world open access to by Internet connection.
Simple have two WiFi units. Use the 'front' one as your secured network, and plug another open wifi unit into the switch port.
Of course you should realized that any unencrypted traffic on the internet can be viewed, if you are in the right spot (cable modem users should be very aware of this).
I was thinking from a users perspective, not from the internal side.
The discussion was about how spam is sent, you seemed to indicate that spammers use the 'bcc' field, and I said that the 'bcc' field was just 'window dressing'.
I know the bcc never ends up in the actual mail, but theres an entry field on the screen when a user is writing a mail.
No, if the 'bcc' field is used, it does send up in the RFC822 message, and a 'proper' SMTP server relaying the message will use it for delivery.
A user's address doesn't need to be in any of the headers, not the 'to', 'from', 'cc' or 'bcc', to recieve any particular message, as you seemed to indicate. It's easier to write a spamming tool that sends hundreds or thousands of 'MAIL TO:' with an otherwise static message, most anti-spamming tools take that into account in their 'spam calculations', so many spammers are now sending the email address either dynamicly in the message as the 'to' field, or as part of large static list in the 'bcc' field
I thought the same thing, but then I realised, they just filled in the BCC fields.
That is not how SMTP works. To an SMTP server everything that you see in your email reader (headers and all) is simply the message itself. The typical SMTP server pays no real attention to the typical email header, although often it will add a couple of lines. It delivers mail based on the SMTP commands, which are never added to the email itself.
An example copied from the FAQ page ('r' is the server and 's' is the client):
R: 220 USC-ISI.ARPA Simple Mail Transfer Service Ready S: HELO LBL-UNIX.ARPA R: 250 USC-ISI.ARPA S: MAIL FROM:<mo@LBL-UNIX.ARPA> R: 250 OK S: RCPT TO:<Jones@USC-ISI.ARPA> R: OK S: DATA R: 354 Start mail input; end with <CRLF>.<CRLF> S: Blah blah blah... S:...etc. etc. etc. S:. R: 250 OK S: QUIT R: 221 USC-ISI.ARPA Service closing transmission channel
The Data command starts the RFC822 message that you usually associate with your email.
His comment is still valid. That's like saying "We did a comprehensive review of the leading web servers, IIS, PWS, and Netscape's baby. We recognize that Apache exists, however we couldn't review it because we couldn't figure out how to get it to work.
Add IBM HTTP Sever and Stronghold (both of which are Apache based), then you would have a fair analogy. For some reason the authors perfered to have an offical representative of the Spam Assassin group, rather than some vendor who was willing to step up to the plate.
Maybe use some of the money to hire a consultant that might actually know something.
might is the key word in that statement. You might was well take the money, go to Las Vegas and spin the wheel, you'd likely have the same expected results. Consultants are a crap shoot, in particular for a single job and a small firm. Besides the guy said he had a small budget, not a medium or big one; Consultants (or at least the ones I have worked with) have a habit of going with expensive options.
Gotta admit that your suggestion about getting a consultant is a valid option, but I think posting the question on./ is a good start, at least he might be able to get some of the basic ideas on the table, so quizing the prospective consultant would be a little easier.
That used to be true with all movies, but I believe that it was Deep Impact which changed that by having their news cannel being MSNBC. In fact, the fictional reporter from MSNBC was one of the main charaters in the movie. Can anyone think of an earlier example?
you soon realize that the Ethernet cable could be a way to bring electricity into remote Indian villages that do not have electricity...
I've got an idea that's even lower tech, just run a lampcord out. Then you can use the normal plugs...
You don't have to be an EE to know how stupid it is. If you think house cats can do some damage, just wait until your powere gets chewed up by a lion. All kidding aside, the longer the run the more loss of power, ethernet cables don't have the kind of sheilding needed for long distance transmition of power (by a long shot). Also remote villages have no infrastructure to the power plants (ie. 'telephone poles').
I've never heard of other media outlets picking up an ad and running it all over the place without charging:)
ahem, 'Swift Boat Veterns for truth' (Just typing it makes me sick...) got lots of attention with just $40,000 worth of initial adverting. Their ad was shown in full on a number of news channels and programs, and mentioned alot elsewhere. Granted software can never expect as much attention, that's why a slow news day would be most welcome.
It's not just about advertising in the NY area, it's about getting it out to the media, making a splash. Many other media outlets will pick up the story and run it, as a story (without being paid). Hopefully it'll be an otherwise slow news day!
...So the idea that you will necessarily only increase your spam load by using the links does seem to be just a myth, and even the percetion that no spammers heed them.
I am sure that you know much more than the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team (US-CERT), which makes that warning quoted in the article.
Yes, but a live address that isn't likely to respond well to spam.
A typical spam operation lives on a response rate of something like.01% (That's one in 10,000). They know that most of the time, their message is never even seen or considered. Those who has taken the time to complete an unsubsribe link shows them that they have considered the spam offering and decided against it. "So, they don't want a new Morgage, but perhaps they will like what I am offering next month....". To a spammer, bandwidth is generally cheap, but anything they can do to increase eye balls is considered important. Perhaps the spammers are holding off for a week or two, but I am sure that your address is being sold. One thing that I noticed years ago was that when I started to get the "buy this bulk email list" spams, my total spams increased a couple of days later. I tried the unsubsribe links several years ago, my spam showed a marked increase (like double). That account, which I haven't regularly used in more that 2 years, still gets more than 50 spams a day.
In this case, the research is compelling: I can tell you with a fair degree of certainty what happened in 1212, and I can also tell you who originally misunderstood it.
Well then edit the page with your information. Unfortunately, I fear that you'll stray just far enough from the NPOV (while insisting that you're not) to start an edit war. In your top level reply, you said...
Everyone's viewpoint tends to get reflected, even it's just plain wrong. For instance, look at the entry on the Children's Crusade of 1212 [wikipedia.org] -- it presents three versions of what happened, but only one (the last one) is "right", meaning that it's the version backed by modern research.
You seem to insist that the other POVs shouldn't be included at all. Legend apparently has no place in your wikipedia.
Disproving a legend or a commonly-held belief should not be viewed as "disrespect" -- that path leads only to ignorance.
Very, Very True. But I believe that you must know the history in order to properly learn from it. The complete history includes legend (BTW, that is what I believe I was stating in my first reply; JFTR I did not state anything saying disproving a legend was bad). It's not just about the fact in the Children's Crusade, but the lesson about how far from the truth a story can go, and where it might lead. Even then, what apperently is the truth, may not be, facts from one era sometimes become fiction in another era. Besides, some people are more interested in what they can learn from history, than a perfect understanding of it. For example I am fairly certain that there is not a god named Zeus, but I am still willing to read stories about his exploits.
For instance, look at the entry on the Children's Crusade of 1212 -- it presents three versions of what happened, but only one (the last one) is "right", meaning that it's the version backed by modern research.
Thanks for the interesting read. I have heard of it, but had no idea of the rich legends and the possible historical reality. Wikipedia aims at giving complete and neutral explanations, and I believe that in this case (as many others) they have achieved it. If you had final editorial control, what you have have printed, perhaps something like...The Children's crusade was a blantent misrepresentation of the facts! and list the Theory about the wandering paupers being the children. However much you disrespect a legend told for nearly a thousand years, it still needs to be recalled or else readers not familiar with the story would be confused upon seeing other references.
but i've had a few complaints... one being it crashes a whole lot more than ie does...
I don't know what you are doing, but I haven't seen firefox crash in several months.
two it takes a bit longer to get it to start up for the first time
I find that Firefox load very quickly, expecially when compared to other third party apps running on a windows pc.
and three embedded windows media files won't seem to play at all
Tools-->Options-->Downloads-->File Types. Make sure that the media play of your choice is confired for that file type and you should be able to see thoses clips. If you still can't see those clips, most likely that site uses active x components to manage the files. Then the real problem would be a site designed for IE, not a problem with Firefox.
First the obvious joke: 90% of all statistic are made up on the spot (or does 95% sound better?)
Most 'artists' (of any kind) don't make a living selling their work, sure most would like to, but the reality is that most are just hard average hard working 'Joes' (and just to be PC 'Janes'), many of whom have trouble buying $20 cd, as many 'non artists'.
For this to be a real survey they would need to beak the artists into several catagories:
I make enough money from music to:
"you mean people get paid!"
"I can buy dog food!"
"I can pay my bills, if lived like a migerent worker"
"I can pay by bills, if I lived like a college student"
"I can own my own trailer"
"I can afford a house in a middle class neiborhood"
Nasa should set standards for the work they want completed, and have it done in a safe manner
Yes they should, but NASA doens't have the lock on safety that you seem to think that they have. Challenger, Columbia, Apollo 1, X-15, not to mention numerous training accidents. Going to space is a serious and dangerous business, there is even a license for it, Space Ship One was the first one given out. Perhaps, that's the oversight that is needed.
any incompatibilities come with very few sites that IMO most people don't use anyway.
I still need IE to view this site properly (well without reloading), but so few people view that site, so I guess that it doesn't matter. I'd say that 5% of the sites I visit "should" be viewed in IE and 1% are broken without it. Granted, I can 'get by' without those sites (including Slashdot), but I'd rather not.
BTW, I dont' think that there is any site which is viewed by 'most' people (defining 'most' as at least 51% of the world's population)
Slashdot Mirror
Just to be complete was this your article, I think that you will find the complete publication more informative than the story based on the Press Release. I did a quick read of the material, and while the publication is really slick they don't do any footnoting, nor do they seem to tell you specificly where they got the figures or what those figures include and exclude (I might have missed it, I'll read the rest later). I wonder if it includes personal giving, or is some kind of 'net' figure (elimating say the amount payed to US farmers for grain). In fairness there is a list of unqualified references at the bottom of the report, which makes fact checking only marginally easier. Also, I find it interesting that they harp on the percentages, in the middle of the paper they say that the best way to improve the encomomy is an increase of the exports from the country (but that doesn't show up in the press report or the executive summary. Kinda like the old saying "give a man a fish...teach him to fish...". In that case you can consider our trade deficit as part of the aid!
All the whining aside, those poor people need our help today. Since you seem to be keeping track, right now, we (the U.S.) lead Japan by 5 million, Germany by more than $32 million, and that is jut what the Feds are putting up.
You might also hold some of the hate that I have for the Bush administration (of course your probably just a regular Troll as your name implies), but your comment serves 'our' cause no good. Comparing bush to a chimp (as your link does) may be funny the first couple of times you see it, but it doesn't support any argument.
I doubt if you have ever worked in or used a corporate help desk, but they tend to be very specific about what software/configurations they are willing to support. For example, my company still uses Office '97 as the installed standard, but we pay for the latest version(I am told that it's because of different version of Access). I use a much newer version on my desktop, but I know that if there is a problem, it's likely that they will force me to downgrade before helping me fix it.
Also many companies are out sourcing IT support to specialized companies.
Personally, I use Firefox as my main browser even at work, but there is a few work related sites which I need to use IE. I don't like it, but it's not my choice. Personally, I check all of my interfaces in both IE (the corporate standard) and Firefox (the soon to be Internet standard), and I encourage 'the powers that be' to be inclusive of Firefox, when designing the browser standards.
I dislike bush more than most, but you 'sir' are living proof that being 'left' doesn't make you 'right'.
Personally, I would start my solution using the IEAK (last time I looked it was free from Microsoft) ,which would allow a very customized IE. Also using automatic updates (if XP), or force users to use a startup script, which checks a network share for an update script.
Lastly (just to be complete), I'd use a strong firwall (duh), with a proxy server to restrict sites. Which is pretty good advice for any group.
even better, I did a search on the beta msn site for 'NeverEverNoSanity WebWorm generation', the best that I got as a search result was 20 (well the first couple of pages), but the site read 11 when I went to it, I suppose that the worm is writing over it's own defacement.
My luggage combination is 1,2,3,4
Of course you should realized that any unencrypted traffic on the internet can be viewed, if you are in the right spot (cable modem users should be very aware of this).
A user's address doesn't need to be in any of the headers, not the 'to', 'from', 'cc' or 'bcc', to recieve any particular message, as you seemed to indicate. It's easier to write a spamming tool that sends hundreds or thousands of 'MAIL TO:' with an otherwise static message, most anti-spamming tools take that into account in their 'spam calculations', so many spammers are now sending the email address either dynamicly in the message as the 'to' field, or as part of large static list in the 'bcc' field
An example copied from the FAQ page ('r' is the server and 's' is the client):
The Data command starts the RFC822 message that you usually associate with your email.
Gotta admit that your suggestion about getting a consultant is a valid option, but I think posting the question on ./ is a good start, at least he might be able to get some of the basic ideas on the table, so quizing the prospective consultant would be a little easier.
That used to be true with all movies, but I believe that it was Deep Impact which changed that by having their news cannel being MSNBC. In fact, the fictional reporter from MSNBC was one of the main charaters in the movie. Can anyone think of an earlier example?
You don't have to be an EE to know how stupid it is. If you think house cats can do some damage, just wait until your powere gets chewed up by a lion. All kidding aside, the longer the run the more loss of power, ethernet cables don't have the kind of sheilding needed for long distance transmition of power (by a long shot). Also remote villages have no infrastructure to the power plants (ie. 'telephone poles').
It's not just about advertising in the NY area, it's about getting it out to the media, making a splash. Many other media outlets will pick up the story and run it, as a story (without being paid). Hopefully it'll be an otherwise slow news day!
Most 'artists' (of any kind) don't make a living selling their work, sure most would like to, but the reality is that most are just hard average hard working 'Joes' (and just to be PC 'Janes'), many of whom have trouble buying $20 cd, as many 'non artists'.
For this to be a real survey they would need to beak the artists into several catagories:
I make enough money from music to:BTW, I dont' think that there is any site which is viewed by 'most' people (defining 'most' as at least 51% of the world's population)