Step 1: Establish a credit account with Oil Company A. Step 2: Call them and ask the price of oil next time you need some. Step 3: Get a load of oil from Oil Company B, who happens to have a better prioce that week. Step 4: Get your credit account cancelled by Oil Company A because they know how often you should need oil and you didn't order form them.
No, it's not a lawsuit, but they're denying you credit for simply buying from their competition.
This is all perfectly legal in the State of Connecticut. It's like driving by a Mobil station to get cheaper gas at Shell, then Mobil cuts up your Mobil card.
Business today seems to run on the notion that if it's not specifically prohibited, we should try and do it, no matter how bad it looks. I get better ethics and learning curves from my third graders.
From your post, it appears you have a problem with others' senses of humor. I never said any of the things you read into it. So far everybody else I've told has laughed. The joke refers to the one letter difference between "Mormon" and "moron", the reason it's funny is that Romney is broadly perceived as a Mormon, and the sitting president is broadly perceived as a moron.
"We did encounter, late in the second stage burn, a roll-control anomaly" = "Rocket fall down go boom."
Actually I think I know what the problem was. As it is son-of-paypal-entrpreneurism, the actual button for turning on the roll control was tiny and at the bottom of a large screen offering to upgrade to super turbo rocket engine pumps and 3% off your next tank of LOX.
Do Maynor, Ellch, KF and LMH in fact speak for " the security community"?
Played or not, Maynor and Ellch came out swinging at Mac users and attacked them on attitude's sake alone.
Last summer, KF was blogging about what a great, rapid job Apple did on its patches, and by January, he's got them on a spit in the public square, and baiting Apple and its users.
Is this to be the public face of the security community?
What I got from the original video, taken on its face, is that the MacBook was not vulnerable, that the exploit was for some 3rd party vendor's stuff, but they were going to use the MacBook just to cheese off Apple users, whose attitudes they perceived as lousy. Human memory being what it is, like Orson Welles' The War Of The Worlds radio broadcast, they had to realize after watching the remaining lion's share of the video that people would mostly retain the image of a MacBook getting pwned.
Beyond the mechanicals, my other impression was that if they were going to demo an important vulnerability and chose to wrap it in several layers of personal feelings for a specific bunch of people, they might be skilled, but they're still unprofessional.
I'm not sure if George is trying to paint them as choirboys or simply C his own A.
... then your stock will make a lot of money, but of course it won't be your stock anymore because your presumed it all a waste. In which case your fellow stockholders will be very glad you weren't the CEO.
often longer. every fw imac, cube, power mac and ibook we ever owned is running tiger and doing better than previous OS versons - every non-fw g3+ is running 10.3.9 and doing very well.
installation? ard. planning? has to be done anyway. etc? macs have less etc.
Hard to imagine a lot of LPFMs competing directly with NPR for money. These are mostly small college radio stations, community / volunteer programs and vanity broadcasting. I give to NPR *AND* my college and to the local charities. The vast majority of donations to NPR are the standard $35, which likely isn't stopping anyone from giving something to others.
Why did I mention college? We set up the low power station at our college in 1979. The field survey was challenging due to the terrain, but we were able to do it. The interference rule were a bit of a challenge, but IIRC weren't as restrictive but still had to be dealt with. Like most small colleges, the money for the college station is funded directly out of the college budget. The bigger college stations are mostly already NPR affiliates.
I for one am glad NPR is there as well as the LPFMs. No commercial station and no LPFM would have been able to do what they did the other day - a story about conservapedia.com - where they counter wikipedia's perceived liberalism with posts contending that all kangaroos came from the two on Noah's ark. They alone in radio have the stones and the reach to get stuff like this out.
A lab I had with 16 iMacs and 4 Gateways. Took my staff longer to babysit the 4 PCs than the 16 iMacs. And only two of those PCs were reliable enough for the PC fans to deem actually useful.
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." - H. L. Mencken
Part of the problem is that we are attempting to create a public utility from what started as a luxury service. We simply want to be able to talk on the phone, we're blineded by the bells and whistles, and the providers are used to being able to charge through the nose for phone calls that - as I've said before - are seemingly carried by gold-encrusted fairies on a steady diet of caviar.
Same on a lesser scale for TV services, and the reverse is true (at least in deregulated Connecticut) of thet existing public utilities like the power company, which is fast becoming a luxury industry. Their stock price doubled, dividends up 50% in 3 years - pretty amazing moneymaking for a utility. I realize they have to answer to investors, but they also have to answer to the people who pretty much have no other way of keeping the lights on, as this happened at the same time our electric rates - and actual bills - nearly doubled.
I haven't proposed violating conservation of matter. The phrase you missed would be *biologically available* nitrogen, which is naturally occurring after what is known as nitrogen fixing, normally done by certain soil bacteria alone as well as in symbiosis with a certain family of green plants (legumes) and a little bit by lightning. N2 is biochemically useless.
When the stats on anthropogenic nitrogen came out, most scientists were caught off-guard. My point addresed the idea that we shouldn't worry about the CO2, the fluctuations were have been small, etc... Well, kiddies, the beginning of this nitrogen increase started out small. In the decade between 1980 and 1990 we deposited as much fertilizer into the system as the entire previous history of agriculture. It's a j-curve. Nature doesn't do well in the short term with things like that.
Yes, the earth will heal itself if we screw up. But how much damage tdo we have to do before we learn on these things? We distinguish ourselves as a species not by being the tallest, or fastest, or strongest, or the most spots, or longest noses, but by being the cleverest. But we seem to never learn when it comes to soiling our own nest, and the nests of thousands of other species while we're at it.
And thanks for the red herring about plate tectonics, which has nothing to do with anything we're discussing here.
We have doubled the amount of biologically-available nitrogen in the ecosphere through the use of fertilizers and fossil fuels. Nobody expected that could be done just by what we decided to add to cultivated arable land, and it took just a hundred years.
They do share it. But they worked hard to be able to use it and they get to be in line ahead of you.
Scientists doing basic research do in fact collaborate, cooperate and compete, as it best serves the task at hand. That would explain the whole peer review process, not to mention the rampant cross-pollination of people between labs, projects, funding sources, large scale projects, etc.
The vast majority of the results do get back to the public, you benefit from them, and they are shared.
I pay my taxes too - and part of that is so that the astronomers who know what they're doing can sort out what comes back from the hubble and let me know when they find something I need to know about.
"That isnt an excuse. I (in part) paid for this damned orbital telescope, and I want the output untouched by some "research group"."
Yeah, I'm not sure the Yosemite Sam approach will get you very far. The "research group" is actually a vast collection of individual and collaborating scientists, research associates, assistants and pretty dedicated scientists who work their tails off in pretty impressive fashion. They're hardly a group deserving of derision, and there's no evil intent behind them.
In case you care to see it - here is the verbatim info from STSci on how data gets used. It's hardly nefarious:
XVI. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS TO DATA
General Observers (GOs) have exclusive access to their scientific data during a proprietary period. Normally this period is the 12 months following the date on which the data are made available to the investigator in a form suitable for scientific analysis. This policy also applies to data obtained during the Director's Discretionary time that is assigned to individual scientists. At the end of the proprietary period, data are placed in the HST archive where they are available for analysis by any interested Scientist.
Proprietary periods longer than 12 months may occasionally be appropriate for Long-Term programs if there is a need to have most or all of the data available before significant scientific results can be obtained. Other special circumstances requiring extensions of the proprietary periods may also arise for GO programs of any scope. NASA policy permits the ST ScI Director to lengthen the proprietary period by up to an additional 12 months, in cases where the Director concludes that an extension is justified. Such requests are subject to the Telescope Allocation Committee (TAC) review. Data-rights extensions beyond a total of two years are possible only when approved individually by the Space Telescope Institute Council upon the recommendation of TAC and the ST ScI Director.
GOs who wish to request a proprietary period shorter than one year, or to waive their proprietary rights, are welcome to specify this to ST ScI. Because of the potential benefit to the community at large, particularly in the case of large projects, GOs are asked to give this possibility serious consideration whenever they feel that such waivers would not be harmful to their programs.
GOs should be aware of the great public information potential of HST data. Cases may arise in which it would be appropriate to release HST data, for public-affairs purposes only, during the proprietary period. In such cases, it is hoped that GOs will cooperate with the ST ScI Office of Public Outreach in meeting the public's right to information. In no case, however, will proprietary HST data be released for such purposes without concurrence of the Principal Investigator. All PIs whose data are released for public-affairs purposes will receive full acknowledgment.
The principal investigator will endeavor in good faith to inform NASA and ST ScI of any planned press release at the earliest practical time and shall consider seriously and in good faith any comments made by NASA and ST ScI prior to the press release.
Except for images and animations produced under this Grant for which copyright shall not be asserted and except if otherwise provided in th
Slashdot Mirror
Step 1: Establish a credit account with Oil Company A.
Step 2: Call them and ask the price of oil next time you need some.
Step 3: Get a load of oil from Oil Company B, who happens to have a better prioce that week.
Step 4: Get your credit account cancelled by Oil Company A because they know how often you should need oil and you didn't order form them.
No, it's not a lawsuit, but they're denying you credit for simply buying from their competition.
This is all perfectly legal in the State of Connecticut. It's like driving by a Mobil station to get cheaper gas at Shell, then Mobil cuts up your Mobil card.
Business today seems to run on the notion that if it's not specifically prohibited, we should try and do it, no matter how bad it looks. I get better ethics and learning curves from my third graders.
From your post, it appears you have a problem with others' senses of humor.
I never said any of the things you read into it. So far everybody else I've told has laughed.
The joke refers to the one letter difference between "Mormon" and "moron", the reason it's funny is that Romney is broadly perceived as a Mormon, and the sitting president is broadly perceived as a moron.
Maybe. I bet we'll be able to answer this question when it all actually happens.
Until then this is all just so much Superman vs Batman.
That was EU77.00 for Vista and 00.54 for Works.
Sounds about right.
The French are looking to prosecute any UFOs who aren't using open standards for their communications.
KF = Kevin Finnisterre (one half of the Month Of Apple Bugs)
LMH = Who knows - he's a secret apparently (and the other half of MOAB with KF)
C his own A, partly as in CYA, partly a joke about KF and LMH preferring initials.
That would David Gelernter, running a leaf blower through his office to get some work done.
for those dictionarry's two.
"We did encounter, late in the second stage burn, a roll-control anomaly"
=
"Rocket fall down go boom."
Actually I think I know what the problem was. As it is son-of-paypal-entrpreneurism, the actual button for turning on the roll control was tiny and at the bottom of a large screen offering to upgrade to super turbo rocket engine pumps and 3% off your next tank of LOX.
Do Maynor, Ellch, KF and LMH in fact speak for " the security community"?
Played or not, Maynor and Ellch came out swinging at Mac users and attacked them on attitude's sake alone.
Last summer, KF was blogging about what a great, rapid job Apple did on its patches, and by January, he's got them on a spit in the public square, and baiting Apple and its users.
Is this to be the public face of the security community?
What I got from the original video, taken on its face, is that the MacBook was not vulnerable, that the exploit was for some 3rd party vendor's stuff, but they were going to use the MacBook just to cheese off Apple users, whose attitudes they perceived as lousy. Human memory being what it is, like Orson Welles' The War Of The Worlds radio broadcast, they had to realize after watching the remaining lion's share of the video that people would mostly retain the image of a MacBook getting pwned.
Beyond the mechanicals, my other impression was that if they were going to demo an important vulnerability and chose to wrap it in several layers of personal feelings for a specific bunch of people, they might be skilled, but they're still unprofessional.
I'm not sure if George is trying to paint them as choirboys or simply C his own A.
When you get your print, turn it over - they put everything you need to know about creation science on the other side.
Have you been to an emergency room lately? There are plennnnnnty of patients. Is he using them for ballast or fuel?
... then your stock will make a lot of money, but of course it won't be your stock anymore because your presumed it all a waste. In which case your fellow stockholders will be very glad you weren't the CEO.
... an iMac 3rd gen. Selling like hotcakes.
a PC needs the scanner, web cam, and floppy as well (floppy drives are now optional on major PCs)
the mac runs out of the box on three wires. two if you have wireless.
the FW drive is just for custom / common setup, and as I mentioned ARD takes care of that over the network.
often longer. every fw imac, cube, power mac and ibook we ever owned is running tiger and doing better than previous OS versons - every non-fw g3+ is running 10.3.9 and doing very well.
installation? ard.
planning? has to be done anyway.
etc? macs have less etc.
i work in a school in avon ct 06001
try "what" > school
and "where" > 06001
and i get
school near 06001 [Alameda] (county), California, United States
that's off by 3,003 miles. I know that because Google Maps told me so.
Hard to imagine a lot of LPFMs competing directly with NPR for money. These are mostly small college radio stations, community / volunteer programs and vanity broadcasting. I give to NPR *AND* my college and to the local charities. The vast majority of donations to NPR are the standard $35, which likely isn't stopping anyone from giving something to others.
Why did I mention college? We set up the low power station at our college in 1979. The field survey was challenging due to the terrain, but we were able to do it. The interference rule were a bit of a challenge, but IIRC weren't as restrictive but still had to be dealt with. Like most small colleges, the money for the college station is funded directly out of the college budget. The bigger college stations are mostly already NPR affiliates.
I for one am glad NPR is there as well as the LPFMs. No commercial station and no LPFM would have been able to do what they did the other day - a story about conservapedia.com - where they counter wikipedia's perceived liberalism with posts contending that all kangaroos came from the two on Noah's ark. They alone in radio have the stones and the reach to get stuff like this out.
A lab I had with 16 iMacs and 4 Gateways.
Took my staff longer to babysit the 4 PCs than the 16 iMacs.
And only two of those PCs were reliable enough for the PC fans to deem actually useful.
I needed a new sig.
The tongue-in-cheek summary shortcut post.
And the wiseass respone to same.
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public." - H. L. Mencken
Part of the problem is that we are attempting to create a public utility from what started as a luxury service. We simply want to be able to talk on the phone, we're blineded by the bells and whistles, and the providers are used to being able to charge through the nose for phone calls that - as I've said before - are seemingly carried by gold-encrusted fairies on a steady diet of caviar.
Same on a lesser scale for TV services, and the reverse is true (at least in deregulated Connecticut) of thet existing public utilities like the power company, which is fast becoming a luxury industry. Their stock price doubled, dividends up 50% in 3 years - pretty amazing moneymaking for a utility. I realize they have to answer to investors, but they also have to answer to the people who pretty much have no other way of keeping the lights on, as this happened at the same time our electric rates - and actual bills - nearly doubled.
I haven't proposed violating conservation of matter. The phrase you missed would be *biologically available* nitrogen, which is naturally occurring after what is known as nitrogen fixing, normally done by certain soil bacteria alone as well as in symbiosis with a certain family of green plants (legumes) and a little bit by lightning. N2 is biochemically useless.
When the stats on anthropogenic nitrogen came out, most scientists were caught off-guard. My point addresed the idea that we shouldn't worry about the CO2, the fluctuations were have been small, etc... Well, kiddies, the beginning of this nitrogen increase started out small. In the decade between 1980 and 1990 we deposited as much fertilizer into the system as the entire previous history of agriculture. It's a j-curve. Nature doesn't do well in the short term with things like that.
Yes, the earth will heal itself if we screw up. But how much damage tdo we have to do before we learn on these things? We distinguish ourselves as a species not by being the tallest, or fastest, or strongest, or the most spots, or longest noses, but by being the cleverest. But we seem to never learn when it comes to soiling our own nest, and the nests of thousands of other species while we're at it.
And thanks for the red herring about plate tectonics, which has nothing to do with anything we're discussing here.
We have doubled the amount of biologically-available nitrogen in the ecosphere through the use of fertilizers and fossil fuels.
Nobody expected that could be done just by what we decided to add to cultivated arable land, and it took just a hundred years.
They do share it. But they worked hard to be able to use it and they get to be in line ahead of you.
Scientists doing basic research do in fact collaborate, cooperate and compete, as it best serves the task at hand. That would explain the whole peer review process, not to mention the rampant cross-pollination of people between labs, projects, funding sources, large scale projects, etc.
The vast majority of the results do get back to the public, you benefit from them, and they are shared.
I pay my taxes too - and part of that is so that the astronomers who know what they're doing can sort out what comes back from the hubble and let me know when they find something I need to know about.
"That isnt an excuse. I (in part) paid for this damned orbital telescope, and I want the output untouched by some "research group"."
Yeah, I'm not sure the Yosemite Sam approach will get you very far. The "research group" is actually a vast collection of individual and collaborating scientists, research associates, assistants and pretty dedicated scientists who work their tails off in pretty impressive fashion. They're hardly a group deserving of derision, and there's no evil intent behind them.
In case you care to see it - here is the verbatim info from STSci on how data gets used. It's hardly nefarious:
XVI. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS TO DATA
General Observers (GOs) have exclusive access to their scientific data during a proprietary period. Normally this period is the 12 months following the date on which the data are made available to the investigator in a form suitable for scientific analysis. This policy also applies to data obtained during the Director's Discretionary time that is assigned to individual scientists. At the end of the proprietary period, data are placed in the HST archive where they are available for analysis by any interested Scientist.
Proprietary periods longer than 12 months may occasionally be appropriate for Long-Term programs if there is a need to have most or all of the data available before significant scientific results can be obtained. Other special circumstances requiring extensions of the proprietary periods may also arise for GO programs of any scope. NASA policy permits the ST ScI Director to lengthen the proprietary period by up to an additional 12 months, in cases where the Director concludes that an extension is justified. Such requests are subject to the Telescope Allocation Committee (TAC) review. Data-rights extensions beyond a total of two years are possible only when approved individually by the Space Telescope Institute Council upon the recommendation of TAC and the ST ScI Director.
GOs who wish to request a proprietary period shorter than one year, or to waive their proprietary rights, are welcome to specify this to ST ScI. Because of the potential benefit to the community at large, particularly in the case of large projects, GOs are asked to give this possibility serious consideration whenever they feel that such waivers would not be harmful to their programs.
GOs should be aware of the great public information potential of HST data. Cases may arise in which it would be appropriate to release HST data, for public-affairs purposes only, during the proprietary period. In such cases, it is hoped that GOs will cooperate with the ST ScI Office of Public Outreach in meeting the public's right to information. In no case, however, will proprietary HST data be released for such purposes without concurrence of the Principal Investigator. All PIs whose data are released for public-affairs purposes will receive full acknowledgment.
The principal investigator will endeavor in good faith to inform NASA and ST ScI of any planned press release at the earliest practical time and shall consider seriously and in good faith any comments made by NASA and ST ScI prior to the press release.
Except for images and animations produced under this Grant for which copyright shall not be asserted and except if otherwise provided in th