Seriously... If I were reinstalling every month (and why would you want to), the last think I would want is to waste all that time individually installing all those apps, not to mention installing Windows and all those updates in the first place. On my machine it takes about 1.5 hours to install Windows and get it completely up to date from Windows Update, then I'd probably take another 1.5 hours to install the next 10 apps and get them configured the way I like.
Copy the drive from a fresh install, then restore it to that state any time in just a few minutes.
I think perhaps there is a potential misalignment with your numbers, thought I admit I did not do any research yet.
The barley or wheat if used in the manner this article seems to outline (using the entire stock) is not comparable to the weight yield of corn used for similar conversion. When you harvest corn usually only the kernels are used and they can compromise as little as 10% of the weight of the product. What weight of corn that is the actual kernel, is mostly water weight, not the weight of the extractable/convertible materials.
Frankly, I have to ask myself (and Ms Feng) this question:
If you don't understand English enough to understand a voting ballot, how are you any more likely to undertand what is going on the country and who/what you are voting for or about? Voting isn't just about choosing something, no matter what that something is, it's about chooseing the somethign that you support or want to see happen.
Sure there are local papers in foreign languages, but I think most such media outlets are rather biased toward a particular viewpoint and won't present the "larger picture" you would get by taking in news from many sources in the predominant language.
I get news from no fewer than about 15 sources a day between local, network, 24hr and international television news, radio stations, newspaper and the Internet. How does that really compare with one small foreign language newspaper or tv broadcast?
Simply allowing the user to select one or more options is not the only requirement. Granted, this should be farily simple but it's not a throw together type of project.
Some things to think about: Change a vote before comitting the ballot Pressing close, but not exactly on a button Sight impaired voters Heat, cold, shock and water resistant Strong and difficult to deface while easy to repair Easily transportable, but easily secured Impervious to external interference from radios, electrical current, magnets, etc. Each voter must start with the machine in the same state "ease drop" proof, so indivudual votes remain secret
Personally I think all these touch screen systems are a cludge and overkill for the job. Use the "fill in the line" paper ballot and an optical scanner. You get a paper trail, instant electronic tabulation, ability to recount and examine "intent" and it's almost universally undersood.
Actually, the "compression" that would probably be used in this type of file format isn't so much about reducing the number of triangles that need to be stored/sent, it's about eliminating them all together. Why store thousands of triangles defining a sphere, each with three 3D coordinates in memory and on disk when you can simply store one 3D point, a shape type and a radius(in this case).
The same thing can be done for any mathematically or algorithmically definable shape, storing the information about what the shape is and where it is will be a lot more space efficient than storing all the triangles. It's also resolution independent, the client gets to decide if they want full, photorealistic rendering, or just a crude but quick preview. No data has to be lost.
This could extend beyond simple shapes by using splines and vectors. A point could be defined as part of a vector and carry force, tension, direction and next neighbor information. When the client renders the image it would link all that back together and draw a shape.
Extending this further, basic shapes can be extruded, lathed, unionized, etc. Using these techniques you can store incredibly large and intricate models in very small storage. I've seen models of cities that only take up a few hundred kilobytes, without textures.
Textures are another issue, sending large bitmaps is sometimes unavoidable, but defining a standard set of procedural textures would decrease overall model size immensely. Imagine instead of including a bump map for lets say "brick", so the grout lines and brick faces would appear to have depth. Such a geometric and otherwise non-specific pattern could be defined with a few variables and generated on-the-fly by the client. Do you really care where the little pits are in the bricks? probably not.
The only bitmap textures that would be sent are those that are very complex or very specific, like lets say the bump map for the logo on a car tire, or the scenery outside a window.
That's probably what all the standards are about, defining what codes will define what shapes/commands, and what sort of procedural texture generators to include.
Microsoft still doesn't seem to get that it may not be the way they are selling their product or who is selling it, but WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
They seem to simply ignore that SUSE Linux may have been the better product in this case, that intelligent people actually made the purchase decision, and that Microsoft would not have been purchased no matter what the cost.
Open parts standards are fine when style is not a significant issue. A working truck is purchased not for looks, but for power, size, efficiency, and reliability. The requirements lend themselves to standardized parts.
Within a consumer vehicle family there are many parts that are standardized. Volkswagen, Audi and Porche all use the same parts across likes, ex: the Audi A4, VW Golf, Jetta, and Passat all use the same 1.8L Turbo Engine. I recall my 1985 Buick Skylark was built on the same "platform" and used the same engine, suspension, transmission and such as the Cavalier, X10, and several other GM vehicles.
Standardized parts in the end lower costs, so manufacturers pump that savings in to more expensive custom parts to distinguish the now all-too-similar vehicles. Otherwise, why buy the Cadillac when you can get most of the same components in the Oldsmobile at half the cost?
SJ at the release of the G5 stated clearly that they "IBM and Apple are today announcing that within 12 months we'll be at 3GHz". You can hear/see this yourself in the WWDC 2003 video at timecode 1:52:00
Unless things continue to go horribly wrong at IBM, that means the G5 will hit that mark in June.
Note that Steve stated they would be at that speed, not announcing that speed. I would expect, based on that statement, that such systems should be shipping by July at the latest.
At this point, I suspect that Apple will forgo any interim speed bump or upgrades for the PowerMac and is simply stockpiling the 3GHz processors in anticipation of a major buying spree once the new systems are released. I recall speculation after the WWDC last year that Steve's statement might mean there would be no major updates until a year later. That speculation seemed to be dismissed quickly by most.
1. Launch iTunes. 2. Click the "Music Store" link in the playlist area 3. Click the "eye" icon in the upper right of the window 4. Click "audiobooks" from the first column labeled "Genre" 5. Click a category from the middle column, then you can see all the "authors" in the third column
There is no (easy) way to see the list of all authors for all categories though, you have to go category by category.
I think perhaps the RIAA is more of a cartel. I don't see any way you could shoehorn the RIAA in to the definition of monopoly. Of course, cartels are illegal in the US, so they call themselves and "industry group" instead. Same deal more or less.
The money issus is exactly what I was, obliquely, pointing out. The "small guy" ususally can't afford to protect a patent against a large corporation bent on stealing it and the government will not assist in the patent's defense through criminal proceedings. The government makes bo guarantee that your patented idea will not be stolen, nor does it do anything to prevent it. We have criminal tresspass/theft laws for most physical property, but not for patents. I'm also now thinking about the irony: if someone stole your actual patent, the booklet/certificate, that would be a crime which the government file charges, but the idea that the patent protects is not afforded the same protection.
On your second part, I think the law is nearly completely silent on any requirement. A quick search of the US Code shows only two requirements for mandetory licensing of a patent to anyone:
1, 42 USC Sec. 7608, or Title 42 Chapter 85 SubChapter III, and it relates only to a pollution control device and only when "there are no reasonable alternative methods to accomplish such purpose".
2. 42 USC Sec. 2188, or Title 42 Chapter 23 Division A, Subchapter XII, which relates to monopolistic use of a patent for "utilization or production of special nuclear material or atomic energy".
I don't know that anyone's ever argued in court that patent licensing is subject to federal anti-discrimination laws, or that a patent holder was required to license on a "fair an equal" basis. I think it boils down to "your patent is your property". The government would not tell you you must loan/lease your dishwasher to anyone who wants to use is, so they wouldn't require you to loan/lease your patent to anyone who wants it. The difference is that if someone steals your dishwasher there is a crime, not so for patented ideas.
Patents do not prevent other people from "stealing" an idea. A patent is just a recognition that the inventor was the first to write down and send the idea. That recognition grants but does not guarantee the inventor exclusive use of the idea for a period of time. Unlike copyright where MPAA, RIAA and other SIGs have purchased legislative insurance, there are not ( to my knowledge) any criminal penalties for patent infringement.
Re:CPU hour, not normal hour
on
Paid To Spam
·
· Score: 4, Informative
You are assuming that a daemon/service is incapable of running at 100% CPU utilization, which is just an entirely erroneous assumption. Background processes can hog just as much CPU time as your newest 3D shooter. It all depends on what the thing it trying to do. Look at Seti or Folding, bot run as daemon/service/background processes and both will use 100% CPU.
Because to date most users think that because you clicked the EULA, you are bound to it. The major point of that EULA is that the writers of the software are not in any way liable for any malfunction or subsequent damages from the malfunction.
Besides, MS's lawyers in court would put on a song and dance show about how no Microsoft system is exploited by a flaw until after the flaw is discovered and the patch released. If the computer users would just install the patches faster, there would be no problem.
It's all bullshit, I know, but it's effectively the case because no private entity has, to date, gathered the funds to battle Microsoft in court over these issues. Theoretically, Microsoft could spend several tens of billions of dollars a year over the next 10 years to litigate such an issue. Who other than a government could put up a legal team with that level of resources? And we've seen just how well all that turns out when a government DOES actually win a case against Microsoft... Microsoft gets a cake and a party, then gets to charge the guests to eat the cake; with extra fees for using the dishes, breathing the air and not getting punched in the stomach tomorrow.
Thanks for the heads-up. Frankly, though, wake from sleep is not an issue for me, I never let my systems sleep since they crunch Seti or Folding jobs in the background 24/7.
Then you need to use a different mail client, or locate the "show all headers" option in your current client. "BCC" just means that when the sending client/server sends the message to multiple people, that it doesn't show the other recipient's addresses.
There are two "To:" address fields associated with any email, which one your client displays is up to the programmer or is sometimes a user selectable option. The "envelope" address is the one I describe below, it's the one the server's transfer between themselves. The "body" or "message" address is the one the email sender put in to their mail client or spam bot, and has absolutely no bearing on anything. Unfortunately the latter is the one most clients seem to display.
When the remote server sending you a message connects to your server it must pass your valid email address to your server, there is no way to pass a message with an anonymous recipient and have the message wind up in the right mailbox.
The sure fire way to locate the address the message was sent to is to tell your mail client to "show all headers", or the "raw" source message. You'll see a series of "Received: from xxx.yyy.com....." lines. The top most entry will end with the line "for username@domain.com....". This will be the address that the server was told the mail message was destined for.
That top-most Received line is pretty much the only thing in an entire email that can not be forged as it is created by your email server.
Apple, back in the ADB days, produced several keyboards for systems. There was a small keyboard that lacked function keys and had the escape key placed just right of the space bar, this was called the "Apple keyboard II". It was a very nice keyboard for use on servers or in tight quarters, there's almost no extra frame around the keys and the thing is very small and light. The sort of thing people would purchase today as an add-on keyboard for a laptop. There was also a behemoth of a keyboard called "Apple Extended Keyboard", which included a full set of function keys (F1 - F15), two complete sets of modifier keys (control, option, command, shift), had a full set of navigation keys (home, end, ins, etc) and a proper layout for the directional arrows, and there were LEDs to display the status of caps and the other "locks". The ergonomics were improved with a 4 step incline adjustment and lots of spacing between sets of keys (function, alpha/num, numpad, nav, arrows). Basically the extended keyboard was a 101 key PC style keyboard built to Apple standards, and like a tank.
The extended keyboard has a very distinct feel, there is a significant amount of travel in the keys, so your fingers actually have to move to press them down and it's difficult to accidentally press a key without being difficult to hit the one you intend. Since the key switches are mechanical, there's a satisfying tactile response when you move the key and the switch connects, you can feel and hear that you are typing a character. This may not mean much to the people that "hunt and peck", but for touch typests, there's a rythm to typing and many times you can tell when you've messed something up just by listening to the rythym of the keys.
I should note that the extended keyboard is large, is has almost an inch of plastic around the left bottom and right of the keys, and several inches at the top where you could place templates for the function keys for different applications. It also weighs almost as much as am iBook.
I love the extended keyboard, and when I get my G5, I'll also be getting a USB-ADB adapter so I can use the extended keyboard on the new machine. I don't like the lightweight, light touch, short stroke keyboards Apple ships with the current systems, not at all.
Another interesting idea, but the SG idea revolves around these addresses automatically expiring after they've received a maximum os 20 emails. Yes you can "restock" the address when it starts to get near zero, but it's certainly not a service you would want to use for a mailing list, or other high volume or long term email relationship. There are entities that email me 40 times a day, I'd have to reset the counter at least daily. You CAN do this in a more automated way with SG that just turns the system in to a mail forwarder but it takes too many steps in my opinion.
I posted a reply to another person's post mentioning several other services like this, all of my general comments about those services apply to SG, mainly that there additional difficulties and potential problems with third party services, especially free ones (like support). I won't go in to the full explanation again here.
The email addresses never expire unless you choose them to, just as I stated in my post. I also doubt, highly, that your mother would need 30 addresses. If she would find the act of visiting a web site and entering a new address beyond her capabilities, then I doubt she's placing her email address in that many places/sites/forms. I would think that person who uses the internet on an occasional basis and corresponds with only a few people would only need two or three aliases.
Managing three aliases is no more complicated than managing a checkbook, in fact a checkbook is far more complicated.
It's not "easy", Real purposefully obfuscates this with high-contrast image laden links for the paid version and uses low-contrast text only for the free version. Most any average surfer will click the high-contrast links before figuring out they are in the wring place and then either giving up in confusion, just paying the fee, or attempting the whole thing over again.
On the Mac side things are even more confusing because there is no free download unless you write/call to cancel your "subscription" within 14 days.
Real are still "not getting it". If they want people to use their client, it needs to be free, easy to access and you should not need to provide any personal information to get it (age, email address, etc).
I haven't tried them simply because I operate my own mail server for several domains, adding/changing/removing the alias entries takes me less than one minute.
If your email address is any indication, the addresses are not human friendly, I certainly would not want to tell people "email me at el-7y3f-zfdx-h1yt@emailias.com". That address has no inherent association to me or the people I would tell the address to. It would work well for automated systems such as slashdot and mailing lists though.
This should not be a separate service that someone subscribes or goes to, it should be inherent to their current mail service for simplicity, speed, security and a at least a few other reasons. As soon as you start adding third parties to the equation, things get complicated. Where'd that email go? Did the sender use the wrong address? Did emailias drop or mis-route it? Did they re-assign the address I was using? Did they just put the message in a low-priority queue that will cause it to be delayed for a few hours? Is my or the sender's ISP filtering mail/connections from/to emailias? Too many extra potential problems for me.
When you're dealing with ISP-ISP email, there's frequently only one or two hops, and with both parties being paying subscribers, they can exert pressure on their respective ISP to track an email problem when necessary. Is emailias (or any third party filter/redirect service for that matter) going to answer the phone and check their logs for your message while you wait?
While I commend such services for helping to minimize spam, for this idea/technique to reach critical mass it must be adopted, advertised and supported by the major ISPs like AOL, EarthLink, NetZero, etc.
AOL seems the natural first candidate, they've already got their customers used to multiple "web personalities" with the whole idea of screen names, and they control the entire widget from connectivity to client.
This is simple and requires no changes to a mail client to function, but one small change would make things easier. The solution does not need to happen all at once to be effective, and does not change any of the current protocols for email (POP,IMAP, SMTP).
The idea: multiple, sender/use specific addresses on the client side. Basically instead of having one address with your ISP, you would have the ability to create up to 50 aliases to your account. Not that these are not 50 accounts, all of your mail still winds up in the main mail account at your ISP.
Lets say you have bob.smith@myisp.com as your email address. The goal here is that you would NEVER give out that address. Instead, you log in to your ISP's web site and create addresses that you then give out. These addresses can be set to expire after a set date, or only be removed manually.
So you like to pay your bills on-line, create an address bobsbilling@myisp.com and use that on all the registration forms for your utilites, credit cards, etc. bobs-shopping: use it to register for any on-line shopping sites bobs-long-ebay-address, sendmailtobob, tossaway32341, etc....
You create an address that you give only to your family/friends, you create an address for each mailing list, create an address that you put in the public LDAP systems and other person-search sites, create an address for sweepstakes/contests, etc.
If you start to get spam on an address (you can easily check the headers to see which address the spam was sent to), you simply change the address and tell the few people/sites that used that address about the new one. The more addresses you have, the fewer places you need to notify of any changes.
The only disadvantage is the initial changeover does take some time/effort. Once created, the addresses mostly just sit there and don't require any maintenance or routine changing.
The advantages: little to no spam; abliity to easily identify WHERE the spammer acquired your address when you do get any; spam does not take up any bandwidth or storage space on the recieving mail server once an address is deleted after getting spammed; no resource intensive and complicated filter software required on the server.
How well does it work? With about 35 addresses out there (may are web site specific), I receive only about 6 spam messages a month. Each and every one of those is sent to a public administrator address like webmaster, hostmaster or the like, not too bad considering I recieve such email for about 10 domains.
In the last year or so since I've started doing this I have only had to disable a single address due to spam, and since it was for a single web site, it took less that five minutes to effect the changeover to a new address.
To those who say that this is too much of a hassle or takes too much effort, I ask this: would you rather have to spend 30 minutes a year maintaining and changing email addresses and informing senders of the new address, or spend 5 minutes a day updating your spam filters and double-cheking the positive results for false hits?
As I stated, this does not require and changes to the mail clients, but if there were one change it would be nice: when you reply to a message the client should automatically use the address that the initial message was sent to instead of attempting to use the actual account address.
Slashdot Mirror
Would be Ghost or something like it.
Seriously... If I were reinstalling every month (and why would you want to), the last think I would want is to waste all that time individually installing all those apps, not to mention installing Windows and all those updates in the first place.
On my machine it takes about 1.5 hours to install Windows and get it completely up to date from Windows Update, then I'd probably take another 1.5 hours to install the next 10 apps and get them configured the way I like.
Copy the drive from a fresh install, then restore it to that state any time in just a few minutes.
I think perhaps there is a potential misalignment with your numbers, thought I admit I did not do any research yet.
The barley or wheat if used in the manner this article seems to outline (using the entire stock) is not comparable to the weight yield of corn used for similar conversion. When you harvest corn usually only the kernels are used and they can compromise as little as 10% of the weight of the product. What weight of corn that is the actual kernel, is mostly water weight, not the weight of the extractable/convertible materials.
Frankly, I have to ask myself (and Ms Feng) this question:
If you don't understand English enough to understand a voting ballot, how are you any more likely to undertand what is going on the country and who/what you are voting for or about? Voting isn't just about choosing something, no matter what that something is, it's about chooseing the somethign that you support or want to see happen.
Sure there are local papers in foreign languages, but I think most such media outlets are rather biased toward a particular viewpoint and won't present the "larger picture" you would get by taking in news from many sources in the predominant language.
I get news from no fewer than about 15 sources a day between local, network, 24hr and international television news, radio stations, newspaper and the Internet. How does that really compare with one small foreign language newspaper or tv broadcast?
Simply allowing the user to select one or more options is not the only requirement. Granted, this should be farily simple but it's not a throw together type of project.
Some things to think about:
Change a vote before comitting the ballot
Pressing close, but not exactly on a button
Sight impaired voters
Heat, cold, shock and water resistant
Strong and difficult to deface while easy to repair
Easily transportable, but easily secured
Impervious to external interference from radios, electrical current, magnets, etc.
Each voter must start with the machine in the same state
"ease drop" proof, so indivudual votes remain secret
Personally I think all these touch screen systems are a cludge and overkill for the job. Use the "fill in the line" paper ballot and an optical scanner. You get a paper trail, instant electronic tabulation, ability to recount and examine "intent" and it's almost universally undersood.
Actually, the "compression" that would probably be used in this type of file format isn't so much about reducing the number of triangles that need to be stored/sent, it's about eliminating them all together.
Why store thousands of triangles defining a sphere, each with three 3D coordinates in memory and on disk when you can simply store one 3D point, a shape type and a radius(in this case).
The same thing can be done for any mathematically or algorithmically definable shape, storing the information about what the shape is and where it is will be a lot more space efficient than storing all the triangles. It's also resolution independent, the client gets to decide if they want full, photorealistic rendering, or just a crude but quick preview. No data has to be lost.
This could extend beyond simple shapes by using splines and vectors. A point could be defined as part of a vector and carry force, tension, direction and next neighbor information. When the client renders the image it would link all that back together and draw a shape.
Extending this further, basic shapes can be extruded, lathed, unionized, etc. Using these techniques you can store incredibly large and intricate models in very small storage. I've seen models of cities that only take up a few hundred kilobytes, without textures.
Textures are another issue, sending large bitmaps is sometimes unavoidable, but defining a standard set of procedural textures would decrease overall model size immensely. Imagine instead of including a bump map for lets say "brick", so the grout lines and brick faces would appear to have depth. Such a geometric and otherwise non-specific pattern could be defined with a few variables and generated on-the-fly by the client. Do you really care where the little pits are in the bricks? probably not.
The only bitmap textures that would be sent are those that are very complex or very specific, like lets say the bump map for the logo on a car tire, or the scenery outside a window.
That's probably what all the standards are about, defining what codes will define what shapes/commands, and what sort of procedural texture generators to include.
Microsoft still doesn't seem to get that it may not be the way they are selling their product or who is selling it, but WHAT THEY ARE SELLING.
They seem to simply ignore that SUSE Linux may have been the better product in this case, that intelligent people actually made the purchase decision, and that Microsoft would not have been purchased no matter what the cost.
Open parts standards are fine when style is not a significant issue. A working truck is purchased not for looks, but for power, size, efficiency, and reliability. The requirements lend themselves to standardized parts.
Within a consumer vehicle family there are many parts that are standardized. Volkswagen, Audi and Porche all use the same parts across likes, ex: the Audi A4, VW Golf, Jetta, and Passat all use the same 1.8L Turbo Engine.
I recall my 1985 Buick Skylark was built on the same "platform" and used the same engine, suspension, transmission and such as the Cavalier, X10, and several other GM vehicles.
Standardized parts in the end lower costs, so manufacturers pump that savings in to more expensive custom parts to distinguish the now all-too-similar vehicles. Otherwise, why buy the Cadillac when you can get most of the same components in the Oldsmobile at half the cost?
... but I don't see G5s there until fall.
SJ at the release of the G5 stated clearly that they "IBM and Apple are today announcing that within 12 months we'll be at 3GHz". You can hear/see this yourself in the WWDC 2003 video at timecode 1:52:00
Unless things continue to go horribly wrong at IBM, that means the G5 will hit that mark in June.
Note that Steve stated they would be at that speed, not announcing that speed. I would expect, based on that statement, that such systems should be shipping by July at the latest.
At this point, I suspect that Apple will forgo any interim speed bump or upgrades for the PowerMac and is simply stockpiling the 3GHz processors in anticipation of a major buying spree once the new systems are released.
I recall speculation after the WWDC last year that Steve's statement might mean there would be no major updates until a year later. That speculation seemed to be dismissed quickly by most.
1. Launch iTunes.
2. Click the "Music Store" link in the playlist area
3. Click the "eye" icon in the upper right of the window
4. Click "audiobooks" from the first column labeled "Genre"
5. Click a category from the middle column, then you can see all the "authors" in the third column
There is no (easy) way to see the list of all authors for all categories though, you have to go category by category.
I think perhaps the RIAA is more of a cartel. I don't see any way you could shoehorn the RIAA in to the definition of monopoly.
Of course, cartels are illegal in the US, so they call themselves and "industry group" instead. Same deal more or less.
There were only two computer busses in the whole world at that point in history?
NO, the poster said there were only TWO MAJOR BUSSES out at that time.
Pedantic though it may be, I'm really trying to figure this one out:
But I say, right tool for the right job
Could you have "the right tool for the wrong job", or "the wrong tool for the right job" No, these just don't make sense?
Saying "The right tool for the job" is sufficient to state what you meant, is shorter and more clear.
The money issus is exactly what I was, obliquely, pointing out. The "small guy" ususally can't afford to protect a patent against a large corporation bent on stealing it and the government will not assist in the patent's defense through criminal proceedings. The government makes bo guarantee that your patented idea will not be stolen, nor does it do anything to prevent it. We have criminal tresspass/theft laws for most physical property, but not for patents.
I'm also now thinking about the irony: if someone stole your actual patent, the booklet/certificate, that would be a crime which the government file charges, but the idea that the patent protects is not afforded the same protection.
On your second part, I think the law is nearly completely silent on any requirement. A quick search of the US Code shows only two requirements for mandetory licensing of a patent to anyone:
1, 42 USC Sec. 7608, or Title 42 Chapter 85 SubChapter III, and it relates only to a pollution control device and only when "there are no reasonable alternative methods to accomplish such purpose".
2. 42 USC Sec. 2188, or Title 42 Chapter 23 Division A, Subchapter XII, which relates to monopolistic use of a patent for "utilization or production of special nuclear material or atomic energy".
I don't know that anyone's ever argued in court that patent licensing is subject to federal anti-discrimination laws, or that a patent holder was required to license on a "fair an equal" basis. I think it boils down to "your patent is your property". The government would not tell you you must loan/lease your dishwasher to anyone who wants to use is, so they wouldn't require you to loan/lease your patent to anyone who wants it. The difference is that if someone steals your dishwasher there is a crime, not so for patented ideas.
Patents do not prevent other people from "stealing" an idea. A patent is just a recognition that the inventor was the first to write down and send the idea. That recognition grants but does not guarantee the inventor exclusive use of the idea for a period of time.
Unlike copyright where MPAA, RIAA and other SIGs have purchased legislative insurance, there are not ( to my knowledge) any criminal penalties for patent infringement.
You are assuming that a daemon/service is incapable of running at 100% CPU utilization, which is just an entirely erroneous assumption. Background processes can hog just as much CPU time as your newest 3D shooter.
It all depends on what the thing it trying to do. Look at Seti or Folding, bot run as daemon/service/background processes and both will use 100% CPU.
Because to date most users think that because you clicked the EULA, you are bound to it. The major point of that EULA is that the writers of the software are not in any way liable for any malfunction or subsequent damages from the malfunction.
Besides, MS's lawyers in court would put on a song and dance show about how no Microsoft system is exploited by a flaw until after the flaw is discovered and the patch released. If the computer users would just install the patches faster, there would be no problem.
It's all bullshit, I know, but it's effectively the case because no private entity has, to date, gathered the funds to battle Microsoft in court over these issues. Theoretically, Microsoft could spend several tens of billions of dollars a year over the next 10 years to litigate such an issue. Who other than a government could put up a legal team with that level of resources? And we've seen just how well all that turns out when a government DOES actually win a case against Microsoft... Microsoft gets a cake and a party, then gets to charge the guests to eat the cake; with extra fees for using the dishes, breathing the air and not getting punched in the stomach tomorrow.
Thanks for the heads-up. Frankly, though, wake from sleep is not an issue for me, I never let my systems sleep since they crunch Seti or Folding jobs in the background 24/7.
My local university sells the extended keyboards as surplus for as little as $1 each. :) I've got enough of them to last me a lifetime.
Then you need to use a different mail client, or locate the "show all headers" option in your current client. "BCC" just means that when the sending client/server sends the message to multiple people, that it doesn't show the other recipient's addresses.
....." lines. The top most entry will end with the line "for username@domain.com....". This will be the address that the server was told the mail message was destined for.
There are two "To:" address fields associated with any email, which one your client displays is up to the programmer or is sometimes a user selectable option. The "envelope" address is the one I describe below, it's the one the server's transfer between themselves. The "body" or "message" address is the one the email sender put in to their mail client or spam bot, and has absolutely no bearing on anything. Unfortunately the latter is the one most clients seem to display.
When the remote server sending you a message connects to your server it must pass your valid email address to your server, there is no way to pass a message with an anonymous recipient and have the message wind up in the right mailbox.
The sure fire way to locate the address the message was sent to is to tell your mail client to "show all headers", or the "raw" source message. You'll see a series of "Received: from xxx.yyy.com
That top-most Received line is pretty much the only thing in an entire email that can not be forged as it is created by your email server.
Apple, back in the ADB days, produced several keyboards for systems. There was a small keyboard that lacked function keys and had the escape key placed just right of the space bar, this was called the "Apple keyboard II". It was a very nice keyboard for use on servers or in tight quarters, there's almost no extra frame around the keys and the thing is very small and light. The sort of thing people would purchase today as an add-on keyboard for a laptop.
There was also a behemoth of a keyboard called "Apple Extended Keyboard", which included a full set of function keys (F1 - F15), two complete sets of modifier keys (control, option, command, shift), had a full set of navigation keys (home, end, ins, etc) and a proper layout for the directional arrows, and there were LEDs to display the status of caps and the other "locks". The ergonomics were improved with a 4 step incline adjustment and lots of spacing between sets of keys (function, alpha/num, numpad, nav, arrows). Basically the extended keyboard was a 101 key PC style keyboard built to Apple standards, and like a tank.
The extended keyboard has a very distinct feel, there is a significant amount of travel in the keys, so your fingers actually have to move to press them down and it's difficult to accidentally press a key without being difficult to hit the one you intend. Since the key switches are mechanical, there's a satisfying tactile response when you move the key and the switch connects, you can feel and hear that you are typing a character. This may not mean much to the people that "hunt and peck", but for touch typests, there's a rythm to typing and many times you can tell when you've messed something up just by listening to the rythym of the keys.
I should note that the extended keyboard is large, is has almost an inch of plastic around the left bottom and right of the keys, and several inches at the top where you could place templates for the function keys for different applications. It also weighs almost as much as am iBook.
I love the extended keyboard, and when I get my G5, I'll also be getting a USB-ADB adapter so I can use the extended keyboard on the new machine. I don't like the lightweight, light touch, short stroke keyboards Apple ships with the current systems, not at all.
Another interesting idea, but the SG idea revolves around these addresses automatically expiring after they've received a maximum os 20 emails. Yes you can "restock" the address when it starts to get near zero, but it's certainly not a service you would want to use for a mailing list, or other high volume or long term email relationship. There are entities that email me 40 times a day, I'd have to reset the counter at least daily. You CAN do this in a more automated way with SG that just turns the system in to a mail forwarder but it takes too many steps in my opinion.
I posted a reply to another person's post mentioning several other services like this, all of my general comments about those services apply to SG, mainly that there additional difficulties and potential problems with third party services, especially free ones (like support). I won't go in to the full explanation again here.
The email addresses never expire unless you choose them to, just as I stated in my post.
I also doubt, highly, that your mother would need 30 addresses. If she would find the act of visiting a web site and entering a new address beyond her capabilities, then I doubt she's placing her email address in that many places/sites/forms. I would think that person who uses the internet on an occasional basis and corresponds with only a few people would only need two or three aliases.
Managing three aliases is no more complicated than managing a checkbook, in fact a checkbook is far more complicated.
It's not "easy", Real purposefully obfuscates this with high-contrast image laden links for the paid version and uses low-contrast text only for the free version.
Most any average surfer will click the high-contrast links before figuring out they are in the wring place and then either giving up in confusion, just paying the fee, or attempting the whole thing over again.
On the Mac side things are even more confusing because there is no free download unless you write/call to cancel your "subscription" within 14 days.
Real are still "not getting it". If they want people to use their client, it needs to be free, easy to access and you should not need to provide any personal information to get it (age, email address, etc).
I haven't tried them simply because I operate my own mail server for several domains, adding/changing/removing the alias entries takes me less than one minute.
If your email address is any indication, the addresses are not human friendly, I certainly would not want to tell people "email me at el-7y3f-zfdx-h1yt@emailias.com". That address has no inherent association to me or the people I would tell the address to. It would work well for automated systems such as slashdot and mailing lists though.
This should not be a separate service that someone subscribes or goes to, it should be inherent to their current mail service for simplicity, speed, security and a at least a few other reasons. As soon as you start adding third parties to the equation, things get complicated. Where'd that email go? Did the sender use the wrong address? Did emailias drop or mis-route it? Did they re-assign the address I was using? Did they just put the message in a low-priority queue that will cause it to be delayed for a few hours? Is my or the sender's ISP filtering mail/connections from/to emailias? Too many extra potential problems for me.
When you're dealing with ISP-ISP email, there's frequently only one or two hops, and with both parties being paying subscribers, they can exert pressure on their respective ISP to track an email problem when necessary. Is emailias (or any third party filter/redirect service for that matter) going to answer the phone and check their logs for your message while you wait?
While I commend such services for helping to minimize spam, for this idea/technique to reach critical mass it must be adopted, advertised and supported by the major ISPs like AOL, EarthLink, NetZero, etc.
AOL seems the natural first candidate, they've already got their customers used to multiple "web personalities" with the whole idea of screen names, and they control the entire widget from connectivity to client.
This is simple and requires no changes to a mail client to function, but one small change would make things easier. The solution does not need to happen all at once to be effective, and does not change any of the current protocols for email (POP,IMAP, SMTP).
The idea: multiple, sender/use specific addresses on the client side. Basically instead of having one address with your ISP, you would have the ability to create up to 50 aliases to your account. Not that these are not 50 accounts, all of your mail still winds up in the main mail account at your ISP.
Lets say you have bob.smith@myisp.com as your email address. The goal here is that you would NEVER give out that address. Instead, you log in to your ISP's web site and create addresses that you then give out. These addresses can be set to expire after a set date, or only be removed manually.
So you like to pay your bills on-line, create an address bobsbilling@myisp.com and use that on all the registration forms for your utilites, credit cards, etc.
bobs-shopping: use it to register for any on-line shopping sites
bobs-long-ebay-address, sendmailtobob, tossaway32341, etc....
You create an address that you give only to your family/friends, you create an address for each mailing list, create an address that you put in the public LDAP systems and other person-search sites, create an address for sweepstakes/contests, etc.
If you start to get spam on an address (you can easily check the headers to see which address the spam was sent to), you simply change the address and tell the few people/sites that used that address about the new one. The more addresses you have, the fewer places you need to notify of any changes.
The only disadvantage is the initial changeover does take some time/effort. Once created, the addresses mostly just sit there and don't require any maintenance or routine changing.
The advantages: little to no spam; abliity to easily identify WHERE the spammer acquired your address when you do get any; spam does not take up any bandwidth or storage space on the recieving mail server once an address is deleted after getting spammed; no resource intensive and complicated filter software required on the server.
How well does it work? With about 35 addresses out there (may are web site specific), I receive only about 6 spam messages a month. Each and every one of those is sent to a public administrator address like webmaster, hostmaster or the like, not too bad considering I recieve such email for about 10 domains.
In the last year or so since I've started doing this I have only had to disable a single address due to spam, and since it was for a single web site, it took less that five minutes to effect the changeover to a new address.
To those who say that this is too much of a hassle or takes too much effort, I ask this: would you rather have to spend 30 minutes a year maintaining and changing email addresses and informing senders of the new address, or spend 5 minutes a day updating your spam filters and double-cheking the positive results for false hits?
As I stated, this does not require and changes to the mail clients, but if there were one change it would be nice: when you reply to a message the client should automatically use the address that the initial message was sent to instead of attempting to use the actual account address.