Yet none of the page fonts look the way they do under IE. Under IE the page fonts look clean and crisp. Under Firefox they look like blocky text. Reminds me of what Netscape and Mozilla looked like under X.
It must be your PC. I test websites side-by-side all the time and see no difference at all here. I've done dozens of Firefox installs and have never seen a font issue on any of them. Seriously dude... it's your box.
Maybe somebody can help answer a question here: It would be very easy (my assumption) to add ogg support to iTunes and the iPod. Why exactly hasn't apple done this? Is it because they want to get people behind their weird compression format, or is it some kind of licensing issue? Something else I haven't thought of?
Well, one idea is that the iPod's processor isn't capable of handling ogg decoding.
Another idea is that Apple doesn't want to add ANY formats to their player. They support MP3, which appeals to Joe Average who illegally downloads music. And they support their DRMed iTMS AAC format for legal purchases from iTMS. Either one is also supported for legal/illegal (depending on your country or current senate bill bought and paid for by the RIAA, etc) ripping of music from CDs. Apple doesn't want ANY other format on an iPod as it may threaten their existing base of iTMS customers.
Which one you believe usually depends on whether you believe Apple is a benevolent company acting in its customers best interests or just another cash-happy ass-of-a-company that isn't more evil simply because it doesn't have the monopoly that Microsoft does.
it needs to be able to sync to your itunes library automatically when you plug it in.
Which, of course, assumes that you use iTunes for your music library. And, while iTunes is great on a Mac, it is a steaming pile of crap on PC and can't even manage to install itself without 2 helper services (1 for iTunes, 1 for iPods) that take up memory whenever your PC is on... regardless of whether you are using iTunes or if you even own an iPod.
It's also assuming that your music collection is small enough to fit on your music player, which is definitely not the case for many of my friends.
Tell that to Harry Daghlin. During a partial criticality test just after the war, a core slipped during a test and went full critical. Harry had to knock one of the two plutonium hemispheres apart by hand. He saw a blue flash, Harry was that quick but it was not quick enough. He died 25 days later.
Actually, it is Harry Dahlian for those who want to learn more about it.
Silicon.com is carrying the news that Mozilla/Firefox usage is up to 5.2% of visitors to ecommerce and corporate sites, up from 3.5% in June. Internet Explorer usage over the same timeframe fell from 95.5% to 93.7%. This makes sense as many web developers have been adopting Firefox very quickly (w3schools Gecko usage is at 17.7%) as well as techies and alpha-geeks (Engadget Gecko usage is at 23% and News.com Gecko usage is up to 18%). Usage among non-geeks is expected to grow as more positive mainstream press reports recommend ditching IE for Firefox.
I never got an error. Though I'd randomly encounter messages that wouldn't "filter". I do spam filtering with a pop3 proxy, and it tags the subject with [spam] if it is flagged as spam. At least once a week I had to manually delete all of the spam out of the inbox.
Ah, I *do* recall this happening on earlier builds of Thunderbird. I believe it was fixed around 0.6 time.
I don't remember ever seeing/modifying such a setting [folder compression]. Regardless, the UI for that and the way it "locked" the application was piss poor.
True, I'll agree with you there. I believe that's why this was modified in later versions. I do remember it being REALLY annoying out of the box.
Oddly enough, I never had a problem with stability. Just a poor user experience.
Yeah, I'll agree with you there, too. On earlier versions, the bugs were annoying as hell. But, I'm actually quite happy with 0.8. I do wish they would update the spam analysis to more closely mimic SpamBayes. They use the same algorithm, but their tokenizer is different.
Ask Google... they seem to think the "put everything in one place and search for it when you need it" interface isn't a bad idea. Manually sorting mail is error prone, time consuming, cumbersome, and makes it hard to find something when you need it. The "rules" Thunderbird provides are very limited and don't work reliably. If it works for you, great, but it's a pita to me.
Actually, most of my friends that played with gmail stopped using it... it was annoying.
The rules in Thunderbird work fine. And reliably. I've never seen an error, at least not with 0.7 or 0.8.
Sure, maybe YOU only do it once every couple months, but it NAGS you constantly until you do it... hit enter by accident once and bam, you're stuck waiting for it to finish.
I haven't seen a compress nag screen since 0.6. Granted, I switched to IMAP at the time. Even when I did use POP and remember the compression, the threshold was a setting in preferences. They *did* choose an annoyingly low one, but you could easily turn it off. Or set it to 10mb. (Meaning, when 10mb can be freed, automatically compress)
Of course not, why would I bother? I already went through the trouble of switching to it once, gave it a few months, and got so pissed off at it that I switched to something else. Given that I don't have any problems with what I'm using now, what reason would I have to switch back to something that I didn't like the first time around?
Well, I wouldn't have recommended folks to switch to it for daily production use a few months ago, unless they were cool with a few bugs. Heck, it's only at 0.8 as of yesterday. A few bugs here and there are to be expected.
I've found stability greatly improved with 0.6 and 0.7. 0.8 feels quite solid and adds in all the fun import stuff that people expect.
So basically your response is "works on my machine" or "I've adapted the way I use mail software to avoid the problems you speak of."
*rolls eyes*
No. That's the way I use email. Why would I want an inbox with thousands of messages I've already responded to? That's what folders are for! If you've got a huge inbox, you'll have problems in many email programs.
As to compressing folders... I do that *MAYBE* once every couple months to keep file sizes down and because I have an external parser for the mbox files for a specific client's analysis.
I don't adapt to using my mail server... this is the way I use it.
Did you try the latest version of Thunderbird with a fresh profile? No? Didn't think so.
So you like having to wait an hour for it to "compress" your mailbox before you can check your email?
Never happens. I don't keep thousands of emails in my inbox. The inbox is for new mail I'm working on now.
You also like all of the naggy dialog boxes (hey, let's compress your inbox...let's compress your inbox...I'm a clippy wanabe, let's compress your inbox...).
Again, never see them. I manually compress the other folders once in a while... to save space and so I can use other tools with the folders.
Or the bugs in the editor which mess with the carriage returns and hide lines you've entered?
I occasionally need to hit enter twice for a new line when replying right below a quoted message. That's about it. If you're having issues with HTML-formatted email, I wouldn't know about that. I only use plaintext.
The ineffective spam filter (they claim it is trainable, but I don't believe it)?
It isn't the BEST filter... I tap SpamBayes for that. But it's accuracy is over 90% and there aren't false-positives.
The slow downloading of messages from multiple accounts?
I have 9 IMAP accounts with 30 IMAP folders being checked and downloaded for offline use. Some with over a thousand NEW messages on occasion. It's quite fast.
The slow/buggy search function?
I use this frequently on folders with lots of messages. Never had a problem. I do wish that searching on custom header tags could use "Does not contain", though.
The inability to batch export mail in any kind of useable format?
Create a new local folder and drop all the email you want exported into that. Boom. Batch export to mbox format. Just copy it out of your mail store for import or use with pretty much anything.
Do a Google search for PearPC. People have most certainly gotten MacOS X running on their x86 boxes.
I have. PearPC has been great for firing up Safari and Mac IE on my AMD 64 3200+ box to test websites. It's no speed demon, though. It's sluggish even on my system. The PearPC folks state that performance is roughly 1/40th that of native.
I think the older iMac is far cooler, in terms of design. It was also very unique. The new G5 iMac is a been-there, done-that design that PC manufacturers have been making for a while now. Like Pelham Sloane started shipping back in January.
I think part of the appeal of the older iMac was that it was so well-designed and had such a completely unique look. This new one's only real unique look is that it's white with a brushed metal stand. Oooooo.
It sucks that it isn't height-adjustable anymore, too. That was one thing I really liked about the old one.
What about the fact that it doesn't work with the iTunes Music Store?
Well, it makes up for that with the fact that it plays WMA, meaning it works with all the other online music stores that the iPod *DOESN'T* work with. So, you can buy your music cheaper from Walmart or Napster.
Of course, you may as well just use eDonkey to get the songs. The iTunes Music Store (and Napster, Walmart, etc) are still screwing the artists.
You're talking about paper. I'm talking about email. Totally different things, as they should be.
In what way are they totally different? The only relevant difference is a different degree of legal protection of privacy. Both delivery systems are fallible, and both types of messages can be opened by people unauthorized to do so.
Email is far more easily forged than paper by entities quite far away. A physical signature is hard to forge. An email is completely trivial to forge.
Well, for starters, email sure as hell shouldn't be treated as a reliable method of informing someone of a lawsuit. That's not what it's there for. Maybe someday when we have fully-verified end-to-end proof of who sent and received what. But not today. And not with SMTP.
When it happens, it will be backed up by law. The equation of e-mail to paper mail in the context of communication between government and citizen is backed in the Netherland by the new law on electronic transactions between government and citizen (Stb. 214, 2004). At the moment the validity of electronic signature in email is backed by European directive 1999/93/EG.
Which is just plain dumb.
Contractual agreements and legal notifications are valid evidence in Dutch courts if backed by relevant ISP archives (at the sending and receiving end). I have used email for official notifications for years without any problems. I even bought my house by email.
Just because an ISP received an email doesn't mean the recipient did. With a paper letter that must be signed for, you know the recipient got it.
The last few months we are starting to have problems, because we now have a few ISP's stealing people's mail through new 'spam filters' based on blacklists they installed (without asking permission to users and with an 'opt-out' procedure users must be aware of). They are really annoying the ministry of justice who is one of the regular victims.
Only the last few months? I don't know of an ISP ANYWHERE that doesn't have spam filters installed and running the moment you sign up for an account. They have to. Spam is now over 60% of all email traffic and growing. My inboxes would be IMPOSSIBLE to read without spam filtering. (300 a day in my main account) I use DNSBLs and bayesian to handle it all.
My prediction is the EU will prohibit or strictly regulate this use of blacklists in the next two years to make its 'electronic government' directives work.
Yeah, and render email useless. Email, right now, can't work without spam filtering for many people. All email filters regardless of type (dnsbl, bayesian, rule-based) or location (server, client) are imperfect and will let some spam through and, occasionally, catch legitimate email. That's the real world, the way it is now. For everyone. This makes email less reliable than it used to be (pre-spam), but more reliable than without the filters since people generally make more mistakes classifying lots of spam with only a few real emails in it than the filters do. And if the EU or the Netherlands can't see that, they're blind.
Anyone has a right to refuse email from anyone else they want.
They don't. There is no such 'right' in Dutch law, and I don't believe it exists anywhere else. Government communication is exempted from the system ('no' stickers obtained from the municipality) we have here for preventing unsollicited mail entering out mailboxes. The government is legally obliged to inform relevant citizens of the decisions it takes pertaining to them (in the general sense), and you are legally obliged to have a valid address 1) physically capable of receiving mail (with a mail slot of the prescribed dimensions:)) and 2) through which you can be contacted.
You're talking about paper. I'm talking about email. Totally different things, as they should be. There is no law anywhere I know of that requires a private citizen to have their mail server accept email from another server. If there is, I'd love to have it pointed out.
My server, my rules. If I don't want email from you, I don't have to accept it.
Besides that, we are talking about the 'right' to decide for others what they are going to refuse.
If you're referring to DNSBLs, they are just statements or opinions published by individuals or groups. DNSBLs do not block email. In most cases, they just state a simple fact (we received a piece of spam from this server and here it is). Individual mail admins choose whether to trust lists. There is no deciding for others going on without an agreement. And if you sign up for an email account on someone else's server, you are agreeing to abide by their rules of the server, which includes what mail the server will accept. Don't like it? Get an account on someone else's server or get your own server.
Besides that, how can you sue someone if you cannot inform them? Electronic communication will have to abide by the same rules as paper communication or we will remain stuck forever in the world of paper communication.
Well, for starters, email sure as hell shouldn't be treated as a reliable method of informing someone of a lawsuit. That's not what it's there for. Maybe someday when we have fully-verified end-to-end proof of who sent and received what. But not today. And not with SMTP.
Thanks for your completely meaningless and unverifyable statistics.
using 0% CPU
Can you give that to me in instructions per second? Or at least CPU cycles per second (usage * clock rate) and processor class?
Since the usage is zero (below what Task Manager can measure), it can't be calculated without using another measurement tool, which I don't have installed. It's running on an AMD 64 3200+.
under 6mb of RAM
With how large of a playlist? And how many plugins installed and running?
1 song (same song) in the playlist on winamp and foobar, no plugins. We're talking base installs here, which is always assumed unless otherwise specified.
Foobar takes ~35 million processor cycles per second on a P3 during playback. Running minimized with a total of ~1,500 songs in its playlists it has about a 2.5MB working set.
Interesting, considering my fresh download/install of the latest version consumes 11mb with just that 1 song in its playlist. Oh, and all numbers are what it settles at (both players consume more CPU/RAM when launching a song).
The government does have valid reasons for unsollicited bulk communication with its citizens, and the ubiquitous spam blacklists are an easy way for people who have a quarrel with a particular public body to frustrate its work.
This is happening in the Netherlands, and the language barrier often slows down the process of getting unlisted. I wonder whether this also happens in English-speaking jurisdictions.
I expect falsely reporting a government body as a spammer will be a crime in many countries in a few years time. It will probably be called "blacklist terrorism".
I tend to doubt it. If it's bulk, and it's unsolicited, in many DNSBLs' views, it's spam. And that's what they are there for. All a DNSBL is is an opinion. This administrator believes that this server sent this type of email. Even if they get all picky over a legal definition of "spam", we'll all just refer to it as UCE or UBE or purple or something. Anyone has a right to refuse email from anyone else they want.
Who the fuck uses the crappy bloated recourse hog that is 5.x anyway.... ah Internet Explorer users.
5.x playing in the background using 0% CPU and under 6mb of RAM... about what 2.x uses... with a feature-set comparable to iTunes without the huge iTunes resource overhead, 3 installed services, etc, etc. A "lightweight" media player like foobar2000 is ~1% CPU and 11mb RAM.
yup, 3.x+ is just broken, I love my 2.xx I'll never change!
Yeah, 3.x was a mess... but 5.x is based on the 2.x version with the modern skin support added in. On my (albeit fast) PC it routinely sits in the background playing MP3s consuming a bit over 5mb or RAM and using 0% CPU.
The Media Library is decent, like iTunes but without genre browsing, and far more customizable. And it isn't a complete piece of shite like iTunes for Windows is.
The only woe I have with firefox is that a recient Windows XP update has screwed up launching webpages from the run dialogue, firefox still works but windows pops up with an error annoying but not that bad. I believe Windows XP would be infinitly better if I could actualy get rid of IE for good, but until such a time I'll just ignore it and hope it goes away.
This is a known bug with the way Firefox 0.9.x registers itself as the default browser to handle http, https, ftp and gopher.
I have a fix for bug 246078 available on my site in the form of a downloadable.REG file that works with all versions of Windows. The Bugzilla bug is linked to from there as well (since you can't link from Slashdot).
Slashdot Mirror
it IS surprising that the new PStwo isn't doing as well.
1. It won't work with existing mod chips.
2. It won't work with the hard drive for Final Fantasy.
Stop being lazy and link your posts...
Samsung SPH-i550 on PDALive
Yet none of the page fonts look the way they do under IE. Under IE the page fonts look clean and crisp. Under Firefox they look like blocky text. Reminds me of what Netscape and Mozilla looked like under X.
It must be your PC. I test websites side-by-side all the time and see no difference at all here. I've done dozens of Firefox installs and have never seen a font issue on any of them. Seriously dude... it's your box.
Maybe somebody can help answer a question here: It would be very easy (my assumption) to add ogg support to iTunes and the iPod. Why exactly hasn't apple done this? Is it because they want to get people behind their weird compression format, or is it some kind of licensing issue? Something else I haven't thought of?
Well, one idea is that the iPod's processor isn't capable of handling ogg decoding.
Another idea is that Apple doesn't want to add ANY formats to their player. They support MP3, which appeals to Joe Average who illegally downloads music. And they support their DRMed iTMS AAC format for legal purchases from iTMS. Either one is also supported for legal/illegal (depending on your country or current senate bill bought and paid for by the RIAA, etc) ripping of music from CDs. Apple doesn't want ANY other format on an iPod as it may threaten their existing base of iTMS customers.
Which one you believe usually depends on whether you believe Apple is a benevolent company acting in its customers best interests or just another cash-happy ass-of-a-company that isn't more evil simply because it doesn't have the monopoly that Microsoft does.
that's not enough!
it needs to be able to sync to your itunes library automatically when you plug it in.
Which, of course, assumes that you use iTunes for your music library. And, while iTunes is great on a Mac, it is a steaming pile of crap on PC and can't even manage to install itself without 2 helper services (1 for iTunes, 1 for iPods) that take up memory whenever your PC is on... regardless of whether you are using iTunes or if you even own an iPod.
It's also assuming that your music collection is small enough to fit on your music player, which is definitely not the case for many of my friends.
Your "beyboard"?
Ummm... exactly.
Actually, it is Harry Dahlian for those who want to learn more about it.
Alright, my beyboard is working against me, too.... it is Daghlian.
Tell that to Harry Daghlin. During a partial criticality test just after the war, a core slipped during a test and went full critical. Harry had to knock one of the two plutonium hemispheres apart by hand. He saw a blue flash, Harry was that quick but it was not quick enough. He died 25 days later.
Actually, it is Harry Dahlian for those who want to learn more about it.
Silicon.com is carrying the news that Mozilla/Firefox usage is up to 5.2% of visitors to ecommerce and corporate sites, up from 3.5% in June. Internet Explorer usage over the same timeframe fell from 95.5% to 93.7%. This makes sense as many web developers have been adopting Firefox very quickly (w3schools Gecko usage is at 17.7%) as well as techies and alpha-geeks (Engadget Gecko usage is at 23% and News.com Gecko usage is up to 18%). Usage among non-geeks is expected to grow as more positive mainstream press reports recommend ditching IE for Firefox.
I never got an error. Though I'd randomly encounter messages that wouldn't "filter". I do spam filtering with a pop3 proxy, and it tags the subject with [spam] if it is flagged as spam. At least once a week I had to manually delete all of the spam out of the inbox.
Ah, I *do* recall this happening on earlier builds of Thunderbird. I believe it was fixed around 0.6 time.
I don't remember ever seeing/modifying such a setting [folder compression]. Regardless, the UI for that and the way it "locked" the application was piss poor.
True, I'll agree with you there. I believe that's why this was modified in later versions. I do remember it being REALLY annoying out of the box.
Oddly enough, I never had a problem with stability. Just a poor user experience.
Yeah, I'll agree with you there, too. On earlier versions, the bugs were annoying as hell. But, I'm actually quite happy with 0.8. I do wish they would update the spam analysis to more closely mimic SpamBayes. They use the same algorithm, but their tokenizer is different.
Ask Google ... they seem to think the "put everything in one place and search for it when you need it" interface isn't a bad idea. Manually sorting mail is error prone, time consuming, cumbersome, and makes it hard to find something when you need it. The "rules" Thunderbird provides are very limited and don't work reliably. If it works for you, great, but it's a pita to me.
... hit enter by accident once and bam, you're stuck waiting for it to finish.
Actually, most of my friends that played with gmail stopped using it... it was annoying.
The rules in Thunderbird work fine. And reliably. I've never seen an error, at least not with 0.7 or 0.8.
Sure, maybe YOU only do it once every couple months, but it NAGS you constantly until you do it
I haven't seen a compress nag screen since 0.6. Granted, I switched to IMAP at the time. Even when I did use POP and remember the compression, the threshold was a setting in preferences. They *did* choose an annoyingly low one, but you could easily turn it off. Or set it to 10mb. (Meaning, when 10mb can be freed, automatically compress)
Of course not, why would I bother? I already went through the trouble of switching to it once, gave it a few months, and got so pissed off at it that I switched to something else. Given that I don't have any problems with what I'm using now, what reason would I have to switch back to something that I didn't like the first time around?
Well, I wouldn't have recommended folks to switch to it for daily production use a few months ago, unless they were cool with a few bugs. Heck, it's only at 0.8 as of yesterday. A few bugs here and there are to be expected.
I've found stability greatly improved with 0.6 and 0.7. 0.8 feels quite solid and adds in all the fun import stuff that people expect.
So basically your response is "works on my machine" or "I've adapted the way I use mail software to avoid the problems you speak of."
*rolls eyes*
No. That's the way I use email. Why would I want an inbox with thousands of messages I've already responded to? That's what folders are for! If you've got a huge inbox, you'll have problems in many email programs.
As to compressing folders... I do that *MAYBE* once every couple months to keep file sizes down and because I have an external parser for the mbox files for a specific client's analysis.
I don't adapt to using my mail server... this is the way I use it.
Did you try the latest version of Thunderbird with a fresh profile? No? Didn't think so.
So you like having to wait an hour for it to "compress" your mailbox before you can check your email?
Never happens. I don't keep thousands of emails in my inbox. The inbox is for new mail I'm working on now.
You also like all of the naggy dialog boxes (hey, let's compress your inbox...let's compress your inbox...I'm a clippy wanabe, let's compress your inbox...).
Again, never see them. I manually compress the other folders once in a while... to save space and so I can use other tools with the folders.
Or the bugs in the editor which mess with the carriage returns and hide lines you've entered?
I occasionally need to hit enter twice for a new line when replying right below a quoted message. That's about it. If you're having issues with HTML-formatted email, I wouldn't know about that. I only use plaintext.
The ineffective spam filter (they claim it is trainable, but I don't believe it)?
It isn't the BEST filter... I tap SpamBayes for that. But it's accuracy is over 90% and there aren't false-positives.
The slow downloading of messages from multiple accounts?
I have 9 IMAP accounts with 30 IMAP folders being checked and downloaded for offline use. Some with over a thousand NEW messages on occasion. It's quite fast.
The slow/buggy search function?
I use this frequently on folders with lots of messages. Never had a problem. I do wish that searching on custom header tags could use "Does not contain", though.
The inability to batch export mail in any kind of useable format?
Create a new local folder and drop all the email you want exported into that. Boom. Batch export to mbox format. Just copy it out of your mail store for import or use with pretty much anything.
Thunderbird DOES NOT handle large volumes of e-mails, and has about half the actual functionality of Outlook (their calendar plug-in is a joke.)
The calendar is only in its formative stages... so it isn't much of a comparison, true.
But Thunderbird not handling large volumes of mail? My 800Mb mail store would beg to differ.
Do a Google search for PearPC. People have most certainly gotten MacOS X running on their x86 boxes.
I have. PearPC has been great for firing up Safari and Mac IE on my AMD 64 3200+ box to test websites. It's no speed demon, though. It's sluggish even on my system. The PearPC folks state that performance is roughly 1/40th that of native.
I think the older iMac is far cooler, in terms of design. It was also very unique. The new G5 iMac is a been-there, done-that design that PC manufacturers have been making for a while now. Like Pelham Sloane started shipping back in January.
I think part of the appeal of the older iMac was that it was so well-designed and had such a completely unique look. This new one's only real unique look is that it's white with a brushed metal stand. Oooooo.
It sucks that it isn't height-adjustable anymore, too. That was one thing I really liked about the old one.
What about the fact that it doesn't work with the iTunes Music Store?
Well, it makes up for that with the fact that it plays WMA, meaning it works with all the other online music stores that the iPod *DOESN'T* work with. So, you can buy your music cheaper from Walmart or Napster.
Of course, you may as well just use eDonkey to get the songs. The iTunes Music Store (and Napster, Walmart, etc) are still screwing the artists.
You're talking about paper. I'm talking about email. Totally different things, as they should be.
In what way are they totally different? The only relevant difference is a different degree of legal protection of privacy. Both delivery systems are fallible, and both types of messages can be opened by people unauthorized to do so.
Email is far more easily forged than paper by entities quite far away. A physical signature is hard to forge. An email is completely trivial to forge.
Well, for starters, email sure as hell shouldn't be treated as a reliable method of informing someone of a lawsuit. That's not what it's there for. Maybe someday when we have fully-verified end-to-end proof of who sent and received what. But not today. And not with SMTP.
When it happens, it will be backed up by law. The equation of e-mail to paper mail in the context of communication between government and citizen is backed in the Netherland by the new law on electronic transactions between government and citizen (Stb. 214, 2004). At the moment the validity of electronic signature in email is backed by European directive 1999/93/EG.
Which is just plain dumb.
Contractual agreements and legal notifications are valid evidence in Dutch courts if backed by relevant ISP archives (at the sending and receiving end). I have used email for official notifications for years without any problems. I even bought my house by email.
Just because an ISP received an email doesn't mean the recipient did. With a paper letter that must be signed for, you know the recipient got it.
The last few months we are starting to have problems, because we now have a few ISP's stealing people's mail through new 'spam filters' based on blacklists they installed (without asking permission to users and with an 'opt-out' procedure users must be aware of). They are really annoying the ministry of justice who is one of the regular victims.
Only the last few months? I don't know of an ISP ANYWHERE that doesn't have spam filters installed and running the moment you sign up for an account. They have to. Spam is now over 60% of all email traffic and growing. My inboxes would be IMPOSSIBLE to read without spam filtering. (300 a day in my main account) I use DNSBLs and bayesian to handle it all.
My prediction is the EU will prohibit or strictly regulate this use of blacklists in the next two years to make its 'electronic government' directives work.
Yeah, and render email useless. Email, right now, can't work without spam filtering for many people. All email filters regardless of type (dnsbl, bayesian, rule-based) or location (server, client) are imperfect and will let some spam through and, occasionally, catch legitimate email. That's the real world, the way it is now. For everyone. This makes email less reliable than it used to be (pre-spam), but more reliable than without the filters since people generally make more mistakes classifying lots of spam with only a few real emails in it than the filters do. And if the EU or the Netherlands can't see that, they're blind.
Anyone has a right to refuse email from anyone else they want.
:)) and 2) through which you can be contacted.
They don't. There is no such 'right' in Dutch law, and I don't believe it exists anywhere else. Government communication is exempted from the system ('no' stickers obtained from the municipality) we have here for preventing unsollicited mail entering out mailboxes. The government is legally obliged to inform relevant citizens of the decisions it takes pertaining to them (in the general sense), and you are legally obliged to have a valid address 1) physically capable of receiving mail (with a mail slot of the prescribed dimensions
You're talking about paper. I'm talking about email. Totally different things, as they should be. There is no law anywhere I know of that requires a private citizen to have their mail server accept email from another server. If there is, I'd love to have it pointed out.
My server, my rules. If I don't want email from you, I don't have to accept it.
Besides that, we are talking about the 'right' to decide for others what they are going to refuse.
If you're referring to DNSBLs, they are just statements or opinions published by individuals or groups. DNSBLs do not block email. In most cases, they just state a simple fact (we received a piece of spam from this server and here it is). Individual mail admins choose whether to trust lists. There is no deciding for others going on without an agreement. And if you sign up for an email account on someone else's server, you are agreeing to abide by their rules of the server, which includes what mail the server will accept. Don't like it? Get an account on someone else's server or get your own server.
Besides that, how can you sue someone if you cannot inform them? Electronic communication will have to abide by the same rules as paper communication or we will remain stuck forever in the world of paper communication.
Well, for starters, email sure as hell shouldn't be treated as a reliable method of informing someone of a lawsuit. That's not what it's there for. Maybe someday when we have fully-verified end-to-end proof of who sent and received what. But not today. And not with SMTP.
Thanks for your completely meaningless and unverifyable statistics.
using 0% CPU
Can you give that to me in instructions per second? Or at least CPU cycles per second (usage * clock rate) and processor class?
Since the usage is zero (below what Task Manager can measure), it can't be calculated without using another measurement tool, which I don't have installed. It's running on an AMD 64 3200+.
under 6mb of RAM
With how large of a playlist? And how many plugins installed and running?
1 song (same song) in the playlist on winamp and foobar, no plugins. We're talking base installs here, which is always assumed unless otherwise specified.
Foobar takes ~35 million processor cycles per second on a P3 during playback. Running minimized with a total of ~1,500 songs in its playlists it has about a 2.5MB working set.
Interesting, considering my fresh download/install of the latest version consumes 11mb with just that 1 song in its playlist. Oh, and all numbers are what it settles at (both players consume more CPU/RAM when launching a song).
The government does have valid reasons for unsollicited bulk communication with its citizens, and the ubiquitous spam blacklists are an easy way for people who have a quarrel with a particular public body to frustrate its work.
This is happening in the Netherlands, and the language barrier often slows down the process of getting unlisted. I wonder whether this also happens in English-speaking jurisdictions.
I expect falsely reporting a government body as a spammer will be a crime in many countries in a few years time. It will probably be called "blacklist terrorism".
I tend to doubt it. If it's bulk, and it's unsolicited, in many DNSBLs' views, it's spam. And that's what they are there for. All a DNSBL is is an opinion. This administrator believes that this server sent this type of email. Even if they get all picky over a legal definition of "spam", we'll all just refer to it as UCE or UBE or purple or something. Anyone has a right to refuse email from anyone else they want.
Who the fuck uses the crappy bloated recourse hog that is 5.x anyway.... ah Internet Explorer users.
5.x playing in the background using 0% CPU and under 6mb of RAM... about what 2.x uses... with a feature-set comparable to iTunes without the huge iTunes resource overhead, 3 installed services, etc, etc. A "lightweight" media player like foobar2000 is ~1% CPU and 11mb RAM.
yup, 3.x+ is just broken, I love my 2.xx I'll never change!
Yeah, 3.x was a mess... but 5.x is based on the 2.x version with the modern skin support added in. On my (albeit fast) PC it routinely sits in the background playing MP3s consuming a bit over 5mb or RAM and using 0% CPU.
The Media Library is decent, like iTunes but without genre browsing, and far more customizable. And it isn't a complete piece of shite like iTunes for Windows is.
as I type, a big-ass piece of AT&T's backbone is having major problems.
The only woe I have with firefox is that a recient Windows XP update has screwed up launching webpages from the run dialogue, firefox still works but windows pops up with an error annoying but not that bad. I believe Windows XP would be infinitly better if I could actualy get rid of IE for good, but until such a time I'll just ignore it and hope it goes away.
.REG file that works with all versions of Windows. The Bugzilla bug is linked to from there as well (since you can't link from Slashdot).
This is a known bug with the way Firefox 0.9.x registers itself as the default browser to handle http, https, ftp and gopher.
I have a fix for bug 246078 available on my site in the form of a downloadable