I tried to subscribe, submitting credit card immediately.
I got an invoice instead.
I called them. They won't have the data until Monday, because ORA has it (supposedly). They said, "sometimes that happens with websites."
I threw up my hands and decided to submit payment for the invoice, using a credit card.
I filled everything out. I checked all the appropriate boxes. I hit "Submit".
The payment page simply reloaded. No confirmation, no email, no nothing.
At this point, I've tried to pay twice. I thought I HAD paid. Twice. If this is how ORA wants to deal with their subscriptions, they just lost one. I have better things to do than help their outsourced subscription-handling company debug their craptacular approach to accepting money.
Although the "groups" link on the www.google.com page goes to the new interface, http://groups.google.com/ still works, and takes you to the old interface everyone prefers.
mainly because I live in Georgia, a state Bush is pretty much guaranteed to win. If it looked close, I'd be voting for Bush
Based on what data? The polling data seems to be not only poorly reported, but in many cases the samples are poorly-selected (e.g., ignoring cellphone users, etc.).
I sincerely hope that you're correct in your assumption about the spread between the two candidates in your area, but honestly... can you afford to be wrong?
"Payroll jobs remain 1.5 million short of where last winter the White House said they would be by now. To avoid being the first president since Herbert Hoover to preside over a net job loss, Bush must hope for 372,000 new jobs a month in August, September and October."
" Down in Silicon Valley, they are again taking out radio ads (proclaiming "olympic size swimming pools" believe it or not), banners at their front door, billboards by the highway..."
Errr...I live in Silicon Valley. Santa Clara, to be precise. I drive up and down the peninsula every day. Those radio ads to which you refer don't exist. The banners, if you'll notice, are old and tattered and on either startups, or are advertising for hardware engineers (MEs, EEs). Not IT folks.
The only billboards by the highway advertising jobs are the pseudocryptic handful of billboards for Google, who are notorious for advertising the same 30 positions every month for the past two years; Google, who currently faces several age discrimination suits; Google, who is in trouble with the FTC for not reporting several million issued options; Google, who has set their hiring standards so high it's impossible to land a job (Ph.D, preferably from Stanford, multiple published papers in the field for which you're being interviewed, personal association with current employees, etc.); Google, who has interviewed damned near every resident of Silicon Valley at least once (many people are now tracking their "Google number", the number of times they've interviewed with them).
Be careful waving that, "Silicon Valley is on the up" flag about. Several of us live here, and it's not. I know people -- people whose name you'd recognize in the IT field due to the extremely popular software they've written, or due to the extremely popular O'Reilly books they've written -- who have trouble getting a job out here. I've seen independent consultants grasping for the security of salaried W-2 employment because the market's still dry. I've seen people -- good people -- lose their homes. I've seen people who are typically invited speakers and lecturers forced to move out of the area due to the lack of employment opportunities out here.
Don't try to tell me the market in Silicon Valley is improving.
(And no, this isn't sour grapes from an unemployed techie. I'm happily employed in a job many of you would give your eyeteeth for. )
"Unemployment went down" means "the people currently drawing unemployment benefits went down".
I think you're forgetting that unemployment benefits have a limited window of availability for any individual. Unemployment figures do not account for those who are unemployed and no longer on the unemployment rolls because they've been unemployed so long.
Bush promised, with his 2003 "Jobs and Growth Plan", which introduced his tax cuts, new job creation. The president's economics staff, the Council of Economic Advisers, projected that the plan would result in the creation of 5.5 million jobs by the end of 2004--306,000 new jobs each month starting in July 2003. The CEA projected that the economy would generate 228,000 jobs a month without a tax cut and 306,000 jobs a month with the tax cut. Thus, it projected that 3,978,000 jobs would be created over the last 13 months. In reality, since the tax cuts took effect, there are 2,565,000 fewer jobs than the administration projected would be created by enactment of its tax cuts.
Since the recession began 40 months ago in March 2001, 1.2 million jobs have disappeared, representing a 0.9% contraction. To put this performance in historical perspective, the Bureau of Labor Statistics began collecting monthly jobs data in 1939 (at the end of the Great Depression). In every previous episode of recession and job decline since 1939, the number of jobs had fully recovered to above the pre-recession peak within 31 months of the start of the recession. Today's labor market would have 6.2 million more jobs if employment had grown by the same 3.7% average that characterized the last three recession cycles. As for who has been hurt most, private-sector jobs have fared worse than public-sector jobs. Jobs in the private sector have dropped by 1.8 million since March 2001, representing a 1.6% contraction.
Added jobs each month aren't enough. There has to be a sustained minimum number of jobs each month to maintain the existing workforce, to say nothing of growing the workforce.
Those minimum monthly new jobs are not being created.
I also find it interesting that you brought up the election, and mentioned candidates. Nobody you're responding to did. You just assumed it was an attack on Bush. Since you want to stroll down that road, what I've said above is waiting for you at the end.
32,000 added jobs doesn't even keep pace with the jobs necessary to employ those new to the workforce, after accounting for those permanently leaving the workforce.
In short, 32k jobs isn't even a holding pattern. It's a net loss.
Typical. Assuming everyone wants to, or is able to, change the system they use.
Stop insisting that the rest of the world conform to your display preferences. 80-column ASCII is the lowest common denominator. All your gee-whiz eye-candy isn't going to change that.
Or do you want all your SMS messages to include 50k of XML markup? After all, you should BUY A REAL COMPUTER, as you say.
How about we bog down your cellphone with 500k emails that say nothing but, "I'll be home at 5", because they're XML-ized, carrying embedded graphics, and so forth? After all, you should just BUY A REAL COMPUTER.
Don't worry; the real world will adjust your perspective soon enough.
Look: If you want to whinge about people using 40-80 character lines, then there's nothing stopping you from CONCATENATING THE LINES AT YOUR END.
You folks seem to want to say that all us 80-column adherents should use autowrapping editors and viewers. Why can't you be arsed to auto-concat lines to whatever length you want, instead?
Job market getting stronger? I think you'd better go back and check the monthly jobless claims against the (revised downwards, sometimes repeatedly) new jobs reports. The past four years may see a zero gain in jobs, possibly even a net loss in jobs in the US.
People are still getting laid off. The example you cite is an exception; it's nowhere near the norm these days, nor will it be anytime in the near future.
In fairness, the Sidekick (and presumably this new one) also multitasks in the manner you describe. I can start loading a webpage, jump back to my current SSH session, and jump from there to read or send email, and from there to respond to an AIM message, all with the click of a button. The sidekick tells me when the web page is loaded, alerts me when I get new email or an AIM message (by the way, it's a real, real-time AIM client, not one of the silly cellphone AIM "clients" that integrate AIM with the messaging subsystem), and I can jump into and out of any app, able to come back to it in the state I left it (e.g., leaving the TCP session open and working during SSH). It's like having screen installed on a cellphone.
It's got a full SSHv2 client. SSH to a Unix host and IRC to anywhere you'd like.
Centralized IS bad, and meatspace identity's...
on
An Online ID Registry
·
· Score: 1
not the right way to go. When you try to tie online identity to real-world identity, you begin to encounter serious circle-of-trust and privacy issues, which many will balk at rather than use your system.
That's why some think the best you can do is track the behavior of an online identity in some manner that minimizes the impact of throwaway identities.
In fact, that's the basis of a distributed, P2P anti-spam project we've recently started, called GOSSiP. There's a white paper and mailing list available, and an active community about to start development.
Simple. You simply forge the MAC of the access point (or just use the broadcast MAC), and spew dissociate/deauthenticate frames. As long as you're transmitting, nobody in range of the transmission can associate with an access point.
Most MUAs set RFC2821 FROM (aka envelope-from) to be identical to RFC2822 From:.
So yes, you would have to reconfigure your MUA every time you changed RFC2822 From:. Or, as you say, you'd have to send mail ONLY through "authorized" MTAs for the domain you're putting in the RHS.
Which of course, requires MUA reconfiguration for each RHS you wish to use. And tends to break when travelling.
Slashdot Mirror
Nope. I made it a point to. I even went back in the cache and verified I did.
It's outsourced.
I tried to subscribe, submitting credit card immediately.
I got an invoice instead.
I called them. They won't have the data until Monday, because ORA has it (supposedly). They said, "sometimes that happens with websites."
I threw up my hands and decided to submit payment for the invoice, using a credit card.
I filled everything out. I checked all the appropriate boxes. I hit "Submit".
The payment page simply reloaded. No confirmation, no email, no nothing.
At this point, I've tried to pay twice. I thought I HAD paid. Twice. If this is how ORA wants to deal with their subscriptions, they just lost one. I have better things to do than help their outsourced subscription-handling company debug their craptacular approach to accepting money.
Although the "groups" link on the www.google.com page goes to the new interface, http://groups.google.com/ still works, and takes you to the old interface everyone prefers.
mainly because I live in Georgia, a state Bush is pretty much guaranteed to win. If it looked close, I'd be voting for Bush
Based on what data? The polling data seems to be not only poorly reported, but in many cases the samples are poorly-selected (e.g., ignoring cellphone users, etc.).
I sincerely hope that you're correct in your assumption about the spread between the two candidates in your area, but honestly... can you afford to be wrong?
From the Washington Post, August 6, 2004:
"Payroll jobs remain 1.5 million short of where last winter the White House said they would be by now. To avoid being the first president since Herbert Hoover to preside over a net job loss, Bush must hope for 372,000 new jobs a month in August, September and October."
As you said, case closed.
" Down in Silicon Valley, they are again taking out radio ads (proclaiming "olympic size swimming pools" believe it or not), banners at their front door, billboards by the highway..."
Errr...I live in Silicon Valley. Santa Clara, to be precise. I drive up and down the peninsula every day. Those radio ads to which you refer don't exist. The banners, if you'll notice, are old and tattered and on either startups, or are advertising for hardware engineers (MEs, EEs). Not IT folks.
The only billboards by the highway advertising jobs are the pseudocryptic handful of billboards for Google, who are notorious for advertising the same 30 positions every month for the past two years; Google, who currently faces several age discrimination suits; Google, who is in trouble with the FTC for not reporting several million issued options; Google, who has set their hiring standards so high it's impossible to land a job (Ph.D, preferably from Stanford, multiple published papers in the field for which you're being interviewed, personal association with current employees, etc.); Google, who has interviewed damned near every resident of Silicon Valley at least once (many people are now tracking their "Google number", the number of times they've interviewed with them).
Be careful waving that, "Silicon Valley is on the up" flag about. Several of us live here, and it's not. I know people -- people whose name you'd recognize in the IT field due to the extremely popular software they've written, or due to the extremely popular O'Reilly books they've written -- who have trouble getting a job out here. I've seen independent consultants grasping for the security of salaried W-2 employment because the market's still dry. I've seen people -- good people -- lose their homes. I've seen people who are typically invited speakers and lecturers forced to move out of the area due to the lack of employment opportunities out here.
Don't try to tell me the market in Silicon Valley is improving.
(And no, this isn't sour grapes from an unemployed techie. I'm happily employed in a job many of you would give your eyeteeth for. )
"Unemployment went down" means "the people currently drawing unemployment benefits went down".
I think you're forgetting that unemployment benefits have a limited window of availability for any individual. Unemployment figures do not account for those who are unemployed and no longer on the unemployment rolls because they've been unemployed so long.
Wrong..
Bush promised, with his 2003 "Jobs and Growth Plan", which introduced his tax cuts, new job creation. The president's economics staff, the Council of Economic Advisers, projected that the plan would result in the creation of 5.5 million jobs by the end of 2004--306,000 new jobs each month starting in July 2003. The CEA projected that the economy would generate 228,000 jobs a month without a tax cut and 306,000 jobs a month with the tax cut. Thus, it projected that 3,978,000 jobs would be created over the last 13 months. In reality, since the tax cuts took effect, there are 2,565,000 fewer jobs than the administration projected would be created by enactment of its tax cuts.
Since the recession began 40 months ago in March 2001, 1.2 million jobs have disappeared, representing a 0.9% contraction. To put this performance in historical perspective, the Bureau of Labor Statistics began collecting monthly jobs data in 1939 (at the end of the Great Depression). In every previous episode of recession and job decline since 1939, the number of jobs had fully recovered to above the pre-recession peak within 31 months of the start of the recession. Today's labor market would have 6.2 million more jobs if employment had grown by the same 3.7% average that characterized the last three recession cycles. As for who has been hurt most, private-sector jobs have fared worse than public-sector jobs. Jobs in the private sector have dropped by 1.8 million since March 2001, representing a 1.6% contraction.
Added jobs each month aren't enough. There has to be a sustained minimum number of jobs each month to maintain the existing workforce, to say nothing of growing the workforce.
Those minimum monthly new jobs are not being created.
I also find it interesting that you brought up the election, and mentioned candidates. Nobody you're responding to did. You just assumed it was an attack on Bush. Since you want to stroll down that road, what I've said above is waiting for you at the end.
Your rebuttal, sir?
32,000 added jobs doesn't even keep pace with the jobs necessary to employ those new to the workforce, after accounting for those permanently leaving the workforce.
In short, 32k jobs isn't even a holding pattern. It's a net loss.
Typical. Assuming everyone wants to, or is able to, change the system they use.
Stop insisting that the rest of the world conform to your display preferences. 80-column ASCII is the lowest common denominator. All your gee-whiz eye-candy isn't going to change that.
Or do you want all your SMS messages to include 50k of XML markup? After all, you should BUY A REAL COMPUTER, as you say.
How about we bog down your cellphone with 500k emails that say nothing but, "I'll be home at 5", because they're XML-ized, carrying embedded graphics, and so forth? After all, you should just BUY A REAL COMPUTER.
Don't worry; the real world will adjust your perspective soon enough.
So auto-concat then split to whatever your line width is. Trivial.
Stop insisting that people change their behavior to suit your display preferences, and fix it on your end.
Look: If you want to whinge about people using 40-80 character lines, then there's nothing stopping you from CONCATENATING THE LINES AT YOUR END.
You folks seem to want to say that all us 80-column adherents should use autowrapping editors and viewers. Why can't you be arsed to auto-concat lines to whatever length you want, instead?
Feh.
Job market getting stronger? I think you'd better go back and check the monthly jobless claims against the (revised downwards, sometimes repeatedly) new jobs reports. The past four years may see a zero gain in jobs, possibly even a net loss in jobs in the US.
People are still getting laid off. The example you cite is an exception; it's nowhere near the norm these days, nor will it be anytime in the near future.
Really? Then how to you recommend people still using vt100 terminals cope?
//e and I spit at you.
What about people using PDA or cellphone-based ssh
clients?
slrn? Mutt?
My Apple
I generally find those who advocate ditching the 80-column standard are the same ones who have no problem with HTML-ized email.
Bah. Feh.
Doesn't happen on mine. No reason it should, either.
No.
In fairness, the Sidekick (and presumably this new one) also multitasks in the manner you describe. I can start loading a webpage, jump back to my current SSH session, and jump from there to read or send email, and from there to respond to an AIM message, all with the click of a button. The sidekick tells me when the web page is loaded, alerts me when I get new email or an AIM message (by the way, it's a real, real-time AIM client, not one of the silly cellphone AIM "clients" that integrate AIM with the messaging subsystem), and I can jump into and out of any app, able to come back to it in the state I left it (e.g., leaving the TCP session open and working during SSH). It's like having screen installed on a cellphone.
It's got a full SSHv2 client. SSH to a Unix host and IRC to anywhere you'd like.
not the right way to go. When you try to tie online identity to real-world identity, you begin to encounter serious circle-of-trust and privacy issues, which many will balk at rather than use your system.
That's why some think the best you can do is track the behavior of an online identity in some manner that minimizes the impact of throwaway identities.
In fact, that's the basis of a distributed, P2P anti-spam project we've recently started, called GOSSiP. There's a white paper and mailing list available, and an active community about to start development.
Simple. You simply forge the MAC of the access point (or just use the broadcast MAC), and spew dissociate/deauthenticate frames. As long as you're transmitting, nobody in range of the transmission can associate with an access point.
This was the basis for the AirJack tool.
Avi Freedman, Chief Network Scientist for Akamai, just won $90,000 in the 2004 WSOP.
Limoncelli and Hogan.
Evi Nemeth's book.
Aeleen Frisch's book.
Mark Burgess' book.
http://www.sage.org/
Note that all are active in SAGE.
"What are bicycles and public transportation, Alex?"
Well, since Meng just scrapped SPF in favor of a combo of SPF and Caller-ID, that's not much of an issue anymore.
Most MUAs set RFC2821 FROM (aka envelope-from) to be identical to RFC2822 From:.
So yes, you would have to reconfigure your MUA every time you changed RFC2822 From:. Or, as you say, you'd have to send mail ONLY through "authorized" MTAs for the domain you're putting in the RHS.
Which of course, requires MUA reconfiguration for each RHS you wish to use. And tends to break when travelling.