MTA-STS is analogous to HSTS (HTTP Strict Transport Security). It's a way for MTAs to express that a connection _must_ be encrypted, so if your server connects and attempts a StartTLS that fails, you can distinguish between "doesn't support TLS" and "something fishy is going on." In the latter case the server can avoid sending mail through a possibly-compromised connection.
TLS Reporting is an extension whereby MTA operators can get reports from other MTAs on which mails succeeded or failed. That is, it lets you see how many mails weren't sent due to MTA-STS failures, which could give you an indication that someone is attempting to attack your users.
You're presenting that a bit disingenuously; it reads more that he was writing the e-mail and used the opportunity to review the data, which is what caused him to change his mind. It's not like he arbitrarily decided from one paragraph to the next that “well, I guess minimize and maximize are going away today!”
This seems more like the GNOME folks don't have a solid idea how to integrate minimization into their new UI paradigm, so rather than saddle users with an implementation that seems poor (i.e. the complaint would probably have been “minimization in GNOME doesn't make sense any more”), they just took it out. I'm not quite sure why the maximize button was removed, although perhaps because they felt it would be odd to have only “maximize” and “close.” The functionality remains, however, and I will say that in Windows 7, I actually always maximize windows using the mouse gesture (or keyboard shortcut) and not the button.
So? Men do the same to me, and I am a man. That's how men communicate. Is it rude? Yes but that's how men are - constantly interrupting one another. It's not because you're a woman but because the men are treating you like any other man. You need to learn to interrupt them too, if you want to be heard.
That has nothing to do with sex. If you're constantly interrupting and talking over people, you're a rude asshole, and it's definitely not just “how men communicate.” It's perfectly possible for men to have good manners and follow appropriate turn-taking when having a conversation.
However, I will say that there are many assholes out there who have not mastered this basic form of courtesy, so I can see how you might get the impression that it's the norm. I've also known some chauvinists who would be more likely to talk over a woman than a man, so I can empathize with the grandparent poster.
I agree, which is why I'm viewing this page in Web Browser 11.4 on Operating System 7.9. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to get back to E-mail Client 4.0 and Text Editor 22.3.
It's likely that Apple was negotiating with Cingular before the AT&T deal was finalized; however, they were probably aware that the merger was going through, one way or another.
While I admit that it is indeed par for the course for US cellphone carriers, the pricing is a little funny.
Although you say the real, unsubsidized price of the iPhone is $400 for the 16GB version, if I want to upgrade the phone on my plan (I have an iPhone 3G) for that price, AT&T indicates they'll sign me up for another 2 year contract. Additionally, the prorated ETF for my contract after 12 months is $115; it would actually be cheaper for me to break contract, pay the $115, then sign up as a "new" customer to buy the phone at $200. Their pricing scheme would make a lot more sense if they just charged you the new contract price plus the prorated ETF (and it would grant the "they subsidized you, so suck it up!" argument a little more weight).
All that being said, none of the features are really compelling enough to upgrade for $400. I do wish I had a bit more space (I only have the 8GB model), but I'll just live without any lossless encoding on my iPhone until next year.
The socket AM3 Phenom 955 is a good budget choice for a completely new computer compared to the i7 920, but it still requires a new motherboard and RAM for an upgrade, and then it loses on price/performance.
The Phenom 955 is backwards compatible with socket AM2+, so you don't necessarily have to purchase a new motherboard and RAM to use it. You do miss out on some features (DDR3 RAM, I think HyperTransport is slower, that sort of thing), but I believe they have a fairly minimal effect on the workload of average users.
Although AMD is having a lot of difficulty competing with Core i7, one does have to admit that they've taken a lot of care in providing a nice upgrade path for older PCs.
I don't think OS9 was a UNIX-system. Ten years ago, that was Apples operating system.
Mac OS X Server 1.0 was released on March 16, 1999. Naturally, it wasn't a desktop OS; however, it was still NextStep (and therefore UNIX) based, and Apple did have it.
They were only prepared for dismal sales. They said the server initially ran 'less well' with 10s of thousands of people online at once. They sold 18,000 copies. All of those people will want to be online at once at the start, so they weren't even really prepared for the real sales they got.
Saying they were only prepared for "dismal sales" is a bit misleading. They expected that the initial launch wouldn't have a huge number of people—it is an independently published game in a niche market with almost no advertising budget, after all—but that the numbers would continue to grow as word-of-mouth spread. This would've given them plenty of time to worry about scaling issues as they started to appear.
It's true that this scaling would've needed to happen eventually if the game took off, but there's no disputing that the launch has suffered a bit from the unexpected popularity. If they were all paying customers, that would be one thing; however, as it stands, the developers had to go out of their way to support a bunch of freeloaders and deal with criticism saying they're unprepared for a launch. It's a pretty rotten way to treat a company that's been very customer-friendly and supportive in the past.
Not only that, they also have to put up with these absurd justifications. "The website didn't tell me enough, I don't trust reviews, and there's no demo—piracy is my only option!" "The pirates helped them identify their scaling issues!" "If only they'd had a serial code then we would've respected their rights!"
I don't mean to single you out—the first quote there isn't even something you said—but we really don't need more people trying to spin piracy as "not so bad" or whatever. 100,000 people are assholes who probably weren't customers anyways, and there is no romantic "sticking it to the man" tale to be had here. I hope that this doesn't discourage Stardock and Gas Powered Games from making PC games in the future.
Although, it has worked swimmingly for blizz and WoW.
That's largely because their competition, at the time, didn't even do that. To take FFXI as an example, the crabs (yes, seriously) you fight at level 60 are visually identical to the crabs you fight at level 1. It was actually a nice improvement to pick up WoW and see differently colored trolls and things.
Modern MMOGs tend to have substantially more art assets, but then of course they have the difficulty of competing with nearly five years of live game content development. Large game publishers lust over Blizzard's subscriber numbers, but how do you break into that market with a new game and survive for longer than 6-12 months?
Although Spear of Destiny is the prequel to Wolfenstein 3D, it was released about six months afterward. Not that Wolfenstein 3D itself was particularly serious, what with mecha-Hitler, the zombies, etc.
The series has always had a pretty fantastical bent to it. It's actually worked rather well, in my opinion, and I just hope that they have something similar to Enemy Territory (or original RTCW) multiplayer included.
Re:The lack of tech understanding in popular cultu
on
Daemon
·
· Score: 1
Technical sloppiness is really the last problem I think Ludlum fans would have with the Bourne movies.
The plot of the films is essentially entirely different than that of the books, with the exception of some character names and the fact that the main character suffers from amnesia for a time. By the time you get to worrying about technical details, you've already accepted that it's just another Hollywood action vehicle, so who cares?
but in peer-to-peer networks composed mostly of people who do not have infinite storage and bandwidth
Peer-to-peer networks are today's warez scene, by and large. Do you think people twenty years ago had infinite storage and bandwidth, too? No, and there were still people who collected as many pieces of software as they could.
I know several people who have this mentality; they download as many videos as they can, often without watching the majority of them. Don't ask me why.
If you want to secure your drive use full disk encryption (now freely available in TrueCrypt) and when it comes to destroying the data just overwrite the header area a thousand times with random garbage. It will take only a second or two, and the whole drive will be useless to anyone.
Except, of course, that the point of the challenge is that instead of encrypting and whatnot (which can be a good idea for other reasons, but I digress), you could just overwrite the drive with 0's once and dispose of the drive safely. This is most likely substantially faster than what many people propose, like overwriting many times or physically destroying the disk.
However, I think their methodology is pretty flawed. The reward for completing the challenge is $40 and the drive itself (which is worth $40-60). You also have to pay shipping, which will run maybe $10-15. I know that it's really not worth it for me to spend any time trying to recover the data from the drive—probably a fairly lengthy process—just for $85.
You might consider looking at a photo of a Red Panda before you comment on that. I think the Firefox logo could pass for a stylized version of a Red Panda, all things considered.
There's some ambiguity in the logo, I suspect intentionally, but it could easily be argued that the Red Panda is so similar to a fox that it's a reasonable (non-misleading) stylization.
This affected me personally, although I wasn't too bothered by it. I have Windows installed on my laptop (a Macbook Pro), and rarely boot into it. Every once in a while, I start it up to grab any updates necessary, and the last time I did this I did indeed run Apple's Software Update tool as well. It listed the Safari update and, despite the fact that I didn't think I had installed Safari on my Windows partition, I assumed it was a legitimate update and installed it.
End result: I now have Safari installed on that Windows partition, even though I didn't have it installed. I don't feel that my actions were retarded, since it's a part of the machine that doesn't see a lot of use, and I think it's rather dishonest of Apple.
When you copy data you contribute towards diminishing it's "value", but the question must be raised: "if no one will pay money for something they can duplicate free-of-charge, does it have 'value' in an economic sense ? If not, is it 'right' for the government to enforce value by giving it's creator absolute legal control over it's distribution" ?
Well, the current system is not ideal (real world systems never are), but I think that some form of this is necessary. Take software, for instance; duplication is essentially free. That means that if I want to make a living selling software, I need to get as much as I possibly can from the initial sale(s)—after that, it's bound to be on a torrent site and then why would you pay me for it? It's true that occasionally you can get people to pay for something out of the kindness of their heart, but that's rather unreliable if it's going to be your sole source of income. Hence, if we don't have some mechanism in place for preventing rampant duplication, the price of goods affected is going to be prohibitively high.
Some people would argue that if you cannot make a substantial amount of money off of the product without artificial copy controls, it's not worth that much. This is a fine view, sure, except that you're essentially saying that you never want to see a large project completed. I'm obviously not going to spend $50 million to develop, say, a popular game if I have no chance of making that back. I would say it's highly unlikely that you could make a decent profit off that much investment if everyone could duplicate your product free of repercussions.
As far as I know there's no universal "don't send me junk mail" program, but there are a couple lists you can sign up for that will dramatically reduce the amount of junk mail you receive.
To get rid of most "pre-approved" credit card offers, there's an official opt-out program. This is free and it does, in fact, work.
To get rid of a bunch of other junk mail (like catalogs etc), you can add yourself to the Direct Marketing Association's opt-out list at their website. This used to cost a small amount ($1, I think), but it's now free--they ask for a credit card number only for verification purposes. I guess they wouldn't want an interested party to suddenly find themselves bereft of junk mail or something.
Between those two, you're pretty much covered. I signed up for both of them and I receive very little unwanted mail.
Ah, yes, that makes sense. Let's use Crysis as an example for why dedicated physics processors wouldn't have an impact on performance. After all, high-end systems running Crysis on higher quality settings (which presumably impacts the physics simulation) get an average of 30fps. No room for improvement there, right?
Really? I can write python without thinking about indentation and whitespace, run it through an auto-indenter when I'm done and have it work correctly? How?
I believe his point was that you could write Python without thinking about indentation and whitespace, but you would have to use curly braces instead to denote blocks. Then the auto-indenter would just parse the blocks and indent appropriately for the language.
As to whether or not that's feasible, I don't know—I'm not a Python programmer—but it sounds reasonable on the surface.
In that case, allow me to give you a quick grammar lesson. If you're going to use a phrase like "us [sic] nerds are pedantic," there's a simple rule for determining whether to use "we" or "us." The sentence should be grammatically correct without the additional descriptive word you've added (nerds in this case). Following that rule, you would consider two possibilities: "we are pedantic" and "us are pedantic." Obviously, the latter is incorrect.
I apologize for being a grammar pedant, but I fear this is something of a pet peeve of mine.
Slashdot Mirror
MTA-STS is analogous to HSTS (HTTP Strict Transport Security). It's a way for MTAs to express that a connection _must_ be encrypted, so if your server connects and attempts a StartTLS that fails, you can distinguish between "doesn't support TLS" and "something fishy is going on." In the latter case the server can avoid sending mail through a possibly-compromised connection.
TLS Reporting is an extension whereby MTA operators can get reports from other MTAs on which mails succeeded or failed. That is, it lets you see how many mails weren't sent due to MTA-STS failures, which could give you an indication that someone is attempting to attack your users.
You're presenting that a bit disingenuously; it reads more that he was writing the e-mail and used the opportunity to review the data, which is what caused him to change his mind. It's not like he arbitrarily decided from one paragraph to the next that “well, I guess minimize and maximize are going away today!”
This seems more like the GNOME folks don't have a solid idea how to integrate minimization into their new UI paradigm, so rather than saddle users with an implementation that seems poor (i.e. the complaint would probably have been “minimization in GNOME doesn't make sense any more”), they just took it out. I'm not quite sure why the maximize button was removed, although perhaps because they felt it would be odd to have only “maximize” and “close.” The functionality remains, however, and I will say that in Windows 7, I actually always maximize windows using the mouse gesture (or keyboard shortcut) and not the button.
There's always 2/2/2222...
That has nothing to do with sex. If you're constantly interrupting and talking over people, you're a rude asshole, and it's definitely not just “how men communicate.” It's perfectly possible for men to have good manners and follow appropriate turn-taking when having a conversation.
However, I will say that there are many assholes out there who have not mastered this basic form of courtesy, so I can see how you might get the impression that it's the norm. I've also known some chauvinists who would be more likely to talk over a woman than a man, so I can empathize with the grandparent poster.
I agree, which is why I'm viewing this page in Web Browser 11.4 on Operating System 7.9. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to get back to E-mail Client 4.0 and Text Editor 22.3.
Apple announced its partnership with Cingular in January 2007, but Wikipedia lists the acquisition by AT&T as occurring in December 2006.
It's likely that Apple was negotiating with Cingular before the AT&T deal was finalized; however, they were probably aware that the merger was going through, one way or another.
While I admit that it is indeed par for the course for US cellphone carriers, the pricing is a little funny.
Although you say the real, unsubsidized price of the iPhone is $400 for the 16GB version, if I want to upgrade the phone on my plan (I have an iPhone 3G) for that price, AT&T indicates they'll sign me up for another 2 year contract. Additionally, the prorated ETF for my contract after 12 months is $115; it would actually be cheaper for me to break contract, pay the $115, then sign up as a "new" customer to buy the phone at $200. Their pricing scheme would make a lot more sense if they just charged you the new contract price plus the prorated ETF (and it would grant the "they subsidized you, so suck it up!" argument a little more weight).
All that being said, none of the features are really compelling enough to upgrade for $400. I do wish I had a bit more space (I only have the 8GB model), but I'll just live without any lossless encoding on my iPhone until next year.
The Phenom 955 is backwards compatible with socket AM2+, so you don't necessarily have to purchase a new motherboard and RAM to use it. You do miss out on some features (DDR3 RAM, I think HyperTransport is slower, that sort of thing), but I believe they have a fairly minimal effect on the workload of average users.
Although AMD is having a lot of difficulty competing with Core i7, one does have to admit that they've taken a lot of care in providing a nice upgrade path for older PCs.
Mac OS X Server 1.0 was released on March 16, 1999. Naturally, it wasn't a desktop OS; however, it was still NextStep (and therefore UNIX) based, and Apple did have it.
Saying they were only prepared for "dismal sales" is a bit misleading. They expected that the initial launch wouldn't have a huge number of people—it is an independently published game in a niche market with almost no advertising budget, after all—but that the numbers would continue to grow as word-of-mouth spread. This would've given them plenty of time to worry about scaling issues as they started to appear.
It's true that this scaling would've needed to happen eventually if the game took off, but there's no disputing that the launch has suffered a bit from the unexpected popularity. If they were all paying customers, that would be one thing; however, as it stands, the developers had to go out of their way to support a bunch of freeloaders and deal with criticism saying they're unprepared for a launch. It's a pretty rotten way to treat a company that's been very customer-friendly and supportive in the past.
Not only that, they also have to put up with these absurd justifications. "The website didn't tell me enough, I don't trust reviews, and there's no demo—piracy is my only option!" "The pirates helped them identify their scaling issues!" "If only they'd had a serial code then we would've respected their rights!"
I don't mean to single you out—the first quote there isn't even something you said—but we really don't need more people trying to spin piracy as "not so bad" or whatever. 100,000 people are assholes who probably weren't customers anyways, and there is no romantic "sticking it to the man" tale to be had here. I hope that this doesn't discourage Stardock and Gas Powered Games from making PC games in the future.
Blizzard always does that. It's just part of their, uh, charm, I guess.
That's largely because their competition, at the time, didn't even do that. To take FFXI as an example, the crabs (yes, seriously) you fight at level 60 are visually identical to the crabs you fight at level 1. It was actually a nice improvement to pick up WoW and see differently colored trolls and things.
Modern MMOGs tend to have substantially more art assets, but then of course they have the difficulty of competing with nearly five years of live game content development. Large game publishers lust over Blizzard's subscriber numbers, but how do you break into that market with a new game and survive for longer than 6-12 months?
Although Spear of Destiny is the prequel to Wolfenstein 3D, it was released about six months afterward. Not that Wolfenstein 3D itself was particularly serious, what with mecha-Hitler, the zombies, etc.
The series has always had a pretty fantastical bent to it. It's actually worked rather well, in my opinion, and I just hope that they have something similar to Enemy Territory (or original RTCW) multiplayer included.
Technical sloppiness is really the last problem I think Ludlum fans would have with the Bourne movies.
The plot of the films is essentially entirely different than that of the books, with the exception of some character names and the fact that the main character suffers from amnesia for a time. By the time you get to worrying about technical details, you've already accepted that it's just another Hollywood action vehicle, so who cares?
Peer-to-peer networks are today's warez scene, by and large. Do you think people twenty years ago had infinite storage and bandwidth, too? No, and there were still people who collected as many pieces of software as they could.
I know several people who have this mentality; they download as many videos as they can, often without watching the majority of them. Don't ask me why.
There's a much better comparison video on YouTube.
Except, of course, that the point of the challenge is that instead of encrypting and whatnot (which can be a good idea for other reasons, but I digress), you could just overwrite the drive with 0's once and dispose of the drive safely. This is most likely substantially faster than what many people propose, like overwriting many times or physically destroying the disk.
However, I think their methodology is pretty flawed. The reward for completing the challenge is $40 and the drive itself (which is worth $40-60). You also have to pay shipping, which will run maybe $10-15. I know that it's really not worth it for me to spend any time trying to recover the data from the drive—probably a fairly lengthy process—just for $85.
PHP actually does have anonymous functions, although they're implemented in a somewhat clunky fashion.
You might consider looking at a photo of a Red Panda before you comment on that. I think the Firefox logo could pass for a stylized version of a Red Panda, all things considered.
There's some ambiguity in the logo, I suspect intentionally, but it could easily be argued that the Red Panda is so similar to a fox that it's a reasonable (non-misleading) stylization.
This affected me personally, although I wasn't too bothered by it. I have Windows installed on my laptop (a Macbook Pro), and rarely boot into it. Every once in a while, I start it up to grab any updates necessary, and the last time I did this I did indeed run Apple's Software Update tool as well. It listed the Safari update and, despite the fact that I didn't think I had installed Safari on my Windows partition, I assumed it was a legitimate update and installed it.
End result: I now have Safari installed on that Windows partition, even though I didn't have it installed. I don't feel that my actions were retarded, since it's a part of the machine that doesn't see a lot of use, and I think it's rather dishonest of Apple.
Well, the current system is not ideal (real world systems never are), but I think that some form of this is necessary. Take software, for instance; duplication is essentially free. That means that if I want to make a living selling software, I need to get as much as I possibly can from the initial sale(s)—after that, it's bound to be on a torrent site and then why would you pay me for it? It's true that occasionally you can get people to pay for something out of the kindness of their heart, but that's rather unreliable if it's going to be your sole source of income. Hence, if we don't have some mechanism in place for preventing rampant duplication, the price of goods affected is going to be prohibitively high.
Some people would argue that if you cannot make a substantial amount of money off of the product without artificial copy controls, it's not worth that much. This is a fine view, sure, except that you're essentially saying that you never want to see a large project completed. I'm obviously not going to spend $50 million to develop, say, a popular game if I have no chance of making that back. I would say it's highly unlikely that you could make a decent profit off that much investment if everyone could duplicate your product free of repercussions.
As far as I know there's no universal "don't send me junk mail" program, but there are a couple lists you can sign up for that will dramatically reduce the amount of junk mail you receive.
To get rid of most "pre-approved" credit card offers, there's an official opt-out program. This is free and it does, in fact, work.
To get rid of a bunch of other junk mail (like catalogs etc), you can add yourself to the Direct Marketing Association's opt-out list at their website. This used to cost a small amount ($1, I think), but it's now free--they ask for a credit card number only for verification purposes. I guess they wouldn't want an interested party to suddenly find themselves bereft of junk mail or something.
Between those two, you're pretty much covered. I signed up for both of them and I receive very little unwanted mail.
Ah, yes, that makes sense. Let's use Crysis as an example for why dedicated physics processors wouldn't have an impact on performance. After all, high-end systems running Crysis on higher quality settings (which presumably impacts the physics simulation) get an average of 30fps. No room for improvement there, right?
I believe his point was that you could write Python without thinking about indentation and whitespace, but you would have to use curly braces instead to denote blocks. Then the auto-indenter would just parse the blocks and indent appropriately for the language.
As to whether or not that's feasible, I don't know—I'm not a Python programmer—but it sounds reasonable on the surface.
In that case, allow me to give you a quick grammar lesson. If you're going to use a phrase like "us [sic] nerds are pedantic," there's a simple rule for determining whether to use "we" or "us." The sentence should be grammatically correct without the additional descriptive word you've added (nerds in this case). Following that rule, you would consider two possibilities: "we are pedantic" and "us are pedantic." Obviously, the latter is incorrect.
I apologize for being a grammar pedant, but I fear this is something of a pet peeve of mine.