At least 1996. I thought longer, but maybe I was wrong. Anyway, this is the earliest reference I could find: a post on Google which quotes all of a post that talks about this header.
I did find a couple of apparent posts from 1995 that appeared to refer to the header.
It's not in any RFCs, but there haven't been any Usenet RFCs really since the '80s.
I worked for a private school in Halifax (the Canadian one) in the mid-90s. Their computer lab was PC-based (MS-DOS 6.22), but every other computer in the school was a Mac (except for a CD-ROM viewing machine in the library). And this was before the iMac; I wouldn't be surprised if the cheaper iMacs now populate that lab. (Not a Rich Kids private school.)
I think I started posting in October of '91. That's what I always thought and the first post I could find was October 2nd, 1991.
Counting this one, though, they seem to have 10 email addresses with posts from me. I think I tracked back all the old VAX accounts I had in my undergrad that I posted from. (I used to sign up for CS courses a lot to get accounts.:)
You can select order by date. Unfortunately, it gives you the most recent first. Fortunately, if there's less than 1000 posts, you can jump right to the end.
Where this breaks down is in big groups; when you've got 30,000 posts/year or so, there's no chance of reading them a 1000 at a time.:)
And legally, those postings are not in the public domain and Google has no right to republish them beyond the purpose that their authors originally implicitly gave permission for: temporary distribution on USENET.
Many, many Usenet newsgroups have kept permanent archives over the years.
There's a header field in NNTP: X-No-Archive. It's been around for a long, long time. Google obeys it when it's present.
Just because you have no clue about Usenet's actual structure doesn't mean Google's not performing a valuable - and valued - service.
The Strata product is free. It has some disabled functions (for example: it only does single light sources), but it renders very nicely. POVRAY has a more difficult UI. RenderBoy is $25 shareware.
GeoCities bought Webring, not Yahoo. Yahoo bought GeoCities some months later, and ended up getting Webring basically by accident.
This is entirely correct. I remember feeling nervous when Webring got swallowed up by the vastly more commercial GC.
The integration was killed quickly and quietly when it became apparent that they had nothing going for them but some half-assed Perl scripts.
WebRing didn't need very much, really. It worked, and worked pretty well. It let ringmasters set up the rings pretty much the way they wanted to: good rings were useful, bad rings were not. Post Yahoo! the rings became much, much less useful, as the Yahoo-borg attempted to corrupt all webrings with its user interface.
Now, I like the Yahoo! UI for a general search directory, but man, it sucks as a page design element. Straightjacketing.
And then I can go on about how All Ring Members Must Now Have a Yahoo! ID Instead of Just an Email Address... bah.
contributing to the delinquency of a minor is a serious offence, and what's more requires the minor to be delinquent.
normally that means the minor has a rap sheet that's a few pages long.
copyright infringement is criminal, sure, but you have to go pretty far with it: hiring a kid to copy music for a weekend just isn't as bad as hiring a kid to service johns for a year or two.
Heck, how long does it take to download your spam on a regular charged-by-the-minute telephone?
At some points, I have received more than 4 spams - per minute. (My filters are better now.) On a 56K dialup (which normally gets you 33K-40K), that would net you in the region of 80% or more of your bandwidth, assuming you were connected 24/7. (Spams are often quite large, and include JPEGs and HTML.)
As far as intuitivity, I can agree that it [Access] may have a slight learning curve, but if you're working with SQL databases in the first place, I'm sure you can handle it.
Yep. But that wasn't my whole point.
The problem with Access is that it wants to be both FileMaker and Oracle.
It fails at both tasks: it lacks the intuitive interface of FileMaker (which is an excellent example of interface design; probably the best app out there for people who need dbs but aren't pros and can't afford to hire pros) and the elegance and good organization of higher-end dbs. In Access' price-range, I'd rather be using FoxPro; it's admittedly slower but its script language is much better than VBA and it's much less crashy. If you want/need SQL, there's always free tools out there that are bunches better than Access.
BTW, on DreamWeaver - What's wrong with its table generation tools? I use it to edit tables all the time...
FrontPage is kind of useless, being that I don't particularly care for its WYSIWYG features, except its stellar handling of tables.
Kind of? KIND OF?! FrontPage is phenomenally awful, and the cause of the majority of bad design out there on the Web.
It's just amazingly bad. DreamWeaver is the only WYSIWYG tool I've used that actually saves time over hand-coding, while still producing usable HTML. Which is probably why it costs more, but oh well.:)
On your other points...
Outlook is bad: security holes aplenty. For my money, the best Win32 emailer is Forte's Agent, a fantastic program (and one of the few reasons why I still keep my Win95 box around). But I'd rather use even Pegasus than Outlook.
We're agreed on Word; I like Excel too.
However, on Access - gah, what an awful, hideous, bloated, confusing mess. It's just fantastically disorganized and radically unintuitive. I now know much more about Access than I did six months ago, and while I agree it's a very flexible tool, it's gotta be the biggest example of the dark side of creeping featurism in commercial software today.
In a way, I'm almost relieved that my Mac can't run it.:)
All that we need is a requirement on MS that they publish details of their file formats, so that competing office products don't have to reverse-engineer the files.
With 100% file-format compatibility, suddenly other office packages (regardless of platform) look a lot better, and MS has to compete on features alone.
Windows 3.0 I believe was the last Windows to default to real mode; on Win 3.1x you had to start it with win -s (I think that was the toggle; I don't have any 286s around anymore:)
I have a 3.11 machine (a 386 with a 20MB HD). I use it on occasion to do word processing. It boots WP 5.1 faster than most of my other computers boot, period:)
I think the reason why M$ produces IE5 for the Mac (which I think is a better browser than Windows IE5 or 5.5; haven't used IE6 yet) is because of tradition.
M$ historically has had a fairly strong presence in the Mac market; for a long time, for example, MS Word was mainly a Mac product. (At the time, Serious PC Owners used WordPerfect exclusively for word processing.) Many Mac users have a generally positive attitude towards M$.
Even Mac users like me (an admitted/. reader:) have something of a fondness for some M$ programs, especially MS Office (I own Office 2001).
I think they're doing it to keep Macheads happy, and thus to keep sales of Office fairly brisk.
Slashdot Mirror
well, that's something at least.
here in canada, we have both kinds of deduction. some deductions come off your net income, some your net payable.
At least 1996. I thought longer, but maybe I was wrong. Anyway, this is the earliest reference I could find: a post on Google which quotes all of a post that talks about this header.
I did find a couple of apparent posts from 1995 that appeared to refer to the header.
It's not in any RFCs, but there haven't been any Usenet RFCs really since the '80s.
I worked for a private school in Halifax (the Canadian one) in the mid-90s. Their computer lab was PC-based (MS-DOS 6.22), but every other computer in the school was a Mac (except for a CD-ROM viewing machine in the library). And this was before the iMac; I wouldn't be surprised if the cheaper iMacs now populate that lab. (Not a Rich Kids private school.)
Does the American tax code really allow corporations to deduct money paid as a result of legal judgments?
Man. I can see it now. Government fines company $500 million, company gets a $500 million deduction on its taxes. Where's the effectiveness in that?
build your own machine from parts, or buy used micros.
or buy from one of the many shops that sell os-free boxen.
well, apart from the pirates anyway :)
I think I started posting in October of '91. That's what I always thought and the first post I could find was October 2nd, 1991.
Counting this one, though, they seem to have 10 email addresses with posts from me. I think I tracked back all the old VAX accounts I had in my undergrad that I posted from. (I used to sign up for CS courses a lot to get accounts. :)
Advanced groups search.
You can select order by date. Unfortunately, it gives you the most recent first. Fortunately, if there's less than 1000 posts, you can jump right to the end.
Where this breaks down is in big groups; when you've got 30,000 posts/year or so, there's no chance of reading them a 1000 at a time. :)
Many, many Usenet newsgroups have kept permanent archives over the years.
There's a header field in NNTP: X-No-Archive. It's been around for a long, long time. Google obeys it when it's present.
Just because you have no clue about Usenet's actual structure doesn't mean Google's not performing a valuable - and valued - service.
If you've got a Mac...
The Strata product is free. It has some disabled functions (for example: it only does single light sources), but it renders very nicely. POVRAY has a more difficult UI. RenderBoy is $25 shareware.
This is entirely correct. I remember feeling nervous when Webring got swallowed up by the vastly more commercial GC.
WebRing didn't need very much, really. It worked, and worked pretty well. It let ringmasters set up the rings pretty much the way they wanted to: good rings were useful, bad rings were not. Post Yahoo! the rings became much, much less useful, as the Yahoo-borg attempted to corrupt all webrings with its user interface.
Now, I like the Yahoo! UI for a general search directory, but man, it sucks as a page design element. Straightjacketing.
And then I can go on about how All Ring Members Must Now Have a Yahoo! ID Instead of Just an Email Address... bah.
I've actually gotten two requests for signups to my (low-traffic) ring since the switch back from Yahoo!
I'm glad it's out of Yahoo! actually. the ring code fascists were irritating. why can't we have custom fragments?
oh, good luck.
contributing to the delinquency of a minor is a serious offence, and what's more requires the minor to be delinquent.
normally that means the minor has a rap sheet that's a few pages long.
copyright infringement is criminal, sure, but you have to go pretty far with it: hiring a kid to copy music for a weekend just isn't as bad as hiring a kid to service johns for a year or two.
At some points, I have received more than 4 spams - per minute. (My filters are better now.) On a 56K dialup (which normally gets you 33K-40K), that would net you in the region of 80% or more of your bandwidth, assuming you were connected 24/7. (Spams are often quite large, and include JPEGs and HTML.)
I'll go you one better:
If you go out with a stupid person, do not introduce it to something that you understand but the stupid person is incapable of dealing with.
A better rule, of course, is to not date stupid people. :)
Final tip, of course, is to remember that being rude to ex-girlfriends is okay, and in fact in many cases necessary.
Hrmph.
I like some of Willis' more comic shorts, but well, whatever.
Recommended woman sf writers:
In other news... /. reviews The Left Hand of Darkness? What's next, The Time Machine? :)
Yep. But that wasn't my whole point.
The problem with Access is that it wants to be both FileMaker and Oracle.
It fails at both tasks: it lacks the intuitive interface of FileMaker (which is an excellent example of interface design; probably the best app out there for people who need dbs but aren't pros and can't afford to hire pros) and the elegance and good organization of higher-end dbs. In Access' price-range, I'd rather be using FoxPro; it's admittedly slower but its script language is much better than VBA and it's much less crashy. If you want/need SQL, there's always free tools out there that are bunches better than Access.
BTW, on DreamWeaver - What's wrong with its table generation tools? I use it to edit tables all the time...
DeCSS was originally released as a Windows-only program.
Kind of? KIND OF?! FrontPage is phenomenally awful, and the cause of the majority of bad design out there on the Web.
It's just amazingly bad. DreamWeaver is the only WYSIWYG tool I've used that actually saves time over hand-coding, while still producing usable HTML. Which is probably why it costs more, but oh well. :)
On your other points...
Outlook is bad: security holes aplenty. For my money, the best Win32 emailer is Forte's Agent, a fantastic program (and one of the few reasons why I still keep my Win95 box around). But I'd rather use even Pegasus than Outlook.
We're agreed on Word; I like Excel too.
However, on Access - gah, what an awful, hideous, bloated, confusing mess. It's just fantastically disorganized and radically unintuitive. I now know much more about Access than I did six months ago, and while I agree it's a very flexible tool, it's gotta be the biggest example of the dark side of creeping featurism in commercial software today.
In a way, I'm almost relieved that my Mac can't run it. :)
It's not all it takes. It's actually a lot less.
All that we need is a requirement on MS that they publish details of their file formats, so that competing office products don't have to reverse-engineer the files.
With 100% file-format compatibility, suddenly other office packages (regardless of platform) look a lot better, and MS has to compete on features alone.
Incorrect.
Windows 3.0 I believe was the last Windows to default to real mode; on Win 3.1x you had to start it with win -s (I think that was the toggle; I don't have any 286s around anymore :)
I have a 3.11 machine (a 386 with a 20MB HD). I use it on occasion to do word processing. It boots WP 5.1 faster than most of my other computers boot, period :)
It works okay.
You raise an excellent point.
I have a theory; it's only a theory, mind.
I think the reason why M$ produces IE5 for the Mac (which I think is a better browser than Windows IE5 or 5.5; haven't used IE6 yet) is because of tradition.
M$ historically has had a fairly strong presence in the Mac market; for a long time, for example, MS Word was mainly a Mac product. (At the time, Serious PC Owners used WordPerfect exclusively for word processing.) Many Mac users have a generally positive attitude towards M$.
Even Mac users like me (an admitted /. reader :) have something of a fondness for some M$ programs, especially MS Office (I own Office 2001).
I think they're doing it to keep Macheads happy, and thus to keep sales of Office fairly brisk.
Well, it is - for me. But I've never lit up. (Cigarette smoke gives me headaches, dizziness and nausea.)
I'm told by quite reliable sources that, for many other people, cigarettes make them feel awfully good indeed.
Perhaps it has long-term unpleasant effects; I won't argue that. But the hit is there.
That's because brussel sprouts are unpleasant. People only get addicted to enjoyable things :)