I henceforth copyright the entity known as 'whitespace', From now on, anybody who utilizes this so-called 'whitespace' as a breaking symbol in between words, numbers, and/or other symbols, and is of the color 'white', and has not licensed such use, will be used for $1000 per cm^3 of the previously defined 'whitespace'.
What about cell phones? Wireless bandwidth is pretty f*cking expensive, and people mostly use it mostly for checking email.
Some also get directions and checks stocks, weather, etc, but if you're getting 100 messages of spam a day (not all that uncommon) that's going to be a huge slice of your charges.
Wrong. I'm carefully saying OUTBOUND. Going to a POP3 or IMAP server and requesting transfer of mail is INBOUND, not outbound (and I mean relative to you). However, if you received spam, and responded to it, you'd pay for the response.
So, in the event that you ONLY paid for outbound traffic, it would be different. Problem is, that's not how it works, you pay for traffic both ways.
So your whole defense is relying on a specific "what if" case that doesn't exist, and hence, fails in current times.
Re:does that work both ways?
on
World Cup Final
·
· Score: 2
I don't know them personally, but if they attribute everything they've done to Jesus instead of themselves, yes.
Correct, however if everybody had unilateral metering of Outbound data (perferabally per meg (10^6 bytes), then it would work. If you were hit by a flood, the person who pays outbound will pay for it. AND YOU pay for it. Would people be so tolerant of snail-mail spam if we had to pay for each letter that arrived in our mailbox? I think not.
And in this, you pay for what you use. That just happens to be the same for electricity, Gasoline, long-distance telephone time (I know, Britans pay per minute local too), sewage and water (if in town that has them). Many of these fluctiuate on time of purchase (as in telephones). If you use at night when less are using it, you pay less. Only when the internet's data is metered like this, will we be able to get past these issues.
It's completely different when -YOU- use it. What if advertisers were allowed to remotely turn on your TV so you could watch an advertisement, then you had to wait for it to finish before you could turn it off again.
There's a fine line between you using something intentionally, and someone else forcing you to use something.
- However, data transmission SHOULD NOT be considered as long as you're paying the correct price for the bandwidth (perferrably per K-packet).
TOS explicitly states 'NO SPAM'. Break the TOS, you lose the contract.
-"You cannot (or should not be able to) force a company to do business with you if they don't want to." --- I believe that isn't the case when the company is a monopoly, and possibly discriminating against you on speech. Yes, it could get that nasty.
Wrong. A company is not obligated to do business with you for any reason whatsoever, save religious or sexual discrimination. My dad owns a store; if somebody walks in that my dad doesn't like, he can tell them to leave, no explanation necessary, AS LONG AS there is no religious or sexual discrimination.
---"If Qwest sees that they are losing customers because they provide internet access to you, they have a fiduciary duty to terminate their business relationship with you."
--Does the same analogy hold true for the snail mail industry? NO. The spam idiots pay for the media, and pay for postage to my house. I just toss it away. Some are crafty and make it look like legit-like bills. Some promise prizes. It all goes to the shredder. My point is, if they pay through the nose for constand bandwidth, give them what they asked.
Except that you're not paying to receive snail mail. You -do- pay for bandwidth. Additionally, spammers generally don't go through legitimate methods of sending mail. They go to through multiple open relays, spoof return addresses, etc, which ends up causing -OTHER- companies bandwidth, and hence, money, and can often result in unintentional DOS attacks.
If he wants to spend the money to send spam, let him.
Fine, when it stops costing me money. Ever heard of metered bandwidth? His constitutional right to freedom of speech ends when I have to pay for it.
Re:does that work both ways?
on
World Cup Final
·
· Score: 2
Exactly, you hit it right on the head. Beliefs are worthless. Praying to Jesus to make you better is simply a placebo effect to make you think you're going to get better.
It's all in the head. Some people need something to believe in, to create hope, because they are too weak-minded to do it themselves. Hence, religion.
Generally speaking, beliefs are worthless, as long as you are strong-willed enough to meet your goals on your own.
Re:And you wonder why people hate Linux Supporters
on
DishPVR 721 Review
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You go through all the trouble to develop a program to be used as a PVR in a computer; you give it out for free so anybody can use it, and ask for only that they do the same when the make it better. Then somebody comes along, takes your work, modifies it, and sells it, claiming it be their own.
Tip: Not everything is GPL. Those that that aren't should have written from scratch, or from licensed code. According to the story, Echostar used GPL'ed code, and hence, are required to, by the GPL license, to GPL their code.
What if this was proprietary code that they took and used? I believe you'd have a different view then, because it's generally called "IP Theft." Keven Mitnick served years in jail for something similar, and he wasn't even getting any financial benefit.
Well, guess what? If they don't GPL their code, they violated copyright. Plian and simple.
I've been kinda following the Gnome2 prereleases, and it's nice. Glad to hear about the save dialog bugfix.
But some others: 1) The old volume control applet was way nicer than the current one, any possibility of it coming back? 2) I know the Gnome2 applet API is not backwards compatible to the old one. How hard would it be to port a Gnome1 applet to a Gnome2 applet, and when will some docs appear? (Specifically looking into porting the Gaim applet, and some others I can't use anymore)
I think that's it for now...
besides that, good f*g job!
One reason, and one reason only
on
GNOME 2.0 Released
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Gnomes are hard working little creatures. They are sworn enemies of the Troll race, and it their duty to kill all Trolls upon sight.
Gnomes work hard, fast, and well. What they create not only shows pure power and eliteness, but also their artistic integrity.
KDE on the other hand stands for K00l D3mon1c E133t. The KDE tribe are the "script-kiddies", the "hacks", in the Lunix Empire. They try to look good, and that is their only objective. While they do succeed on some fronts, they fail miserably on others.
All in all, the KDE's are the George Bush's, wheras the Gnomes are the Alfred Hoffmans.
--
That said, it's just a joke, both are truly kickass, but, IMHO, I prefer Gnome (although recently moving to Fluxbox)....
One thing it went over was that people did not like the idea of GPS being always enabled on their phones, so what's happening is that phones will only enable GPS when 911 is dialed or the user hits a "I AM HERE" button, or the phone will have an option to disable GPS altogether.
Of course, there's a lot of people who claim that information like this should not be released because of the damage it can cause. Yes, I agree. The people erleasing the information should have better judgement; BUT the people should not be arrested either.
Let me explain: There's also a lot of people who claim guns should be illegal; I beg to differ (and this is an easier analogy).
Criminals will get guns regardless of whether they're legal or not. Most criminals don't even get guns legitimately; they're usually stolen from gun shops, other people, or bought from gun shows, where they don't have to follow the 7-day laws. Either way, they're acquired through the black market. Criminals (or at least intelligent criminals) don't just go out and buy assault rifles, because they know they can be traced.
If guns were criminalized, all it'll do is prevent legitimate owners from purchasing them for self defense. Now our problem is the personality of this country (the states) where crime runs rampant, the punishment doesn't make sense (I'd get more time for trafficking weed than killing someone), so people don't really have a reason to act responsibly.
In effect, if someone really wants to derail a train, they -will- find out; however, people who know should show enough responsibility to not tell everybody, as it can easily become some twisted game for a bunch of teenagers. As they've obviously shown, they don't have that responsibility, and of course, the government wants to punish them.
What it comes down to is we need to reevaluate our moral responsibilites, and keep the government out of it...
I dunno, I think I'm just rambling now, but it sense (to me) at one point....
I'll accept his statement that both are equally secure, especially because it's 90% based on the administrator. The difference is however, an open-source bug has many more eyes upon the code, and hence can be fixed a lot easier. Also, (though this doesn't pertain to most closed-source products) for programs that were written to be platform-independent, all the fix needs to be is a small.diff file, for the administrators who want to be as secure as possible, and the official builds and packages can be released in appropriate time.
The other great thing about OS is you -yourself- can fix the bug. No, not everyone is a kernel-hacker, but theres many bugs in small programs too.
IE: Not too long after I had first installed linux, I found out I couldn't play a certain DVD with any DVD player (Ogle, MPlayer, Xine, etc) although they played all of the others ones perfectly. The program was libdvdread (I believe) was dying on a failed (and completely unnecessary) assert(). So I opened up the sources, commented that line, recompiled, and wa-la, I could watch it now.
So, yeah, there will always be bugs; some OS products may even have more because they're made by people in their spare time (ie: apps like Ogle); but regardless, because there's many more eyes on it, bugs can (and generally are) fixed a lot quicker....
Wrong. A program not crashing when there's an error is more destructive than a program crashing when there's an error.
Why?
Because then they give out incorrect data, and in the case of servers, become vulnerable to security exploits. A DOS attack is much less dangerous than a root-exploit, and if a program continues running even after an error has occurred, it is much, much easier to exploit.
And all programs can crash, regardless of what language they're written in. Good programs crash cleanly AS SOON AS an unrecoverable error is discovered.
Speaking of which, why not name what language you're talking about?
take for example, this program, which displays the number*2:
int main() {
int i;
cin >> i;
cout mult_by_two(i); }
int mult_by_two(int x) {
return x * 3; }
It's not going to crash, and it'll compile fine, but it's plainly --wrong--. You can -not- create a language which prevents bad coding, until you create a system which can interface your computer with your f*cking head.
Slashdot Mirror
I henceforth copyright the entity known as 'whitespace', From now on, anybody who utilizes this so-called 'whitespace' as a breaking symbol in between words, numbers, and/or other symbols, and is of the color 'white', and has not licensed such use, will be used for $1000 per cm^3 of the previously defined 'whitespace'.
What about cell phones? Wireless bandwidth is pretty f*cking expensive, and people mostly use it mostly for checking email.
Some also get directions and checks stocks, weather, etc, but if you're getting 100 messages of spam a day (not all that uncommon) that's going to be a huge slice of your charges.
Wrong. I'm carefully saying OUTBOUND. Going to a POP3 or IMAP server and requesting transfer of mail is INBOUND, not outbound (and I mean relative to you). However, if you received spam, and responded to it, you'd pay for the response.
So, in the event that you ONLY paid for outbound traffic, it would be different. Problem is, that's not how it works, you pay for traffic both ways.
So your whole defense is relying on a specific "what if" case that doesn't exist, and hence, fails in current times.
I don't know them personally, but if they attribute everything they've done to Jesus instead of themselves, yes.
Correct, however if everybody had unilateral metering of Outbound data (perferabally per meg (10^6 bytes), then it would work. If you were hit by a flood, the person who pays outbound will pay for it.
AND YOU pay for it. Would people be so tolerant of snail-mail spam if we had to pay for each letter that arrived in our mailbox? I think not.
And in this, you pay for what you use. That just happens to be the same for electricity, Gasoline, long-distance telephone time (I know, Britans pay per minute local too), sewage and water (if in town that has them). Many of these fluctiuate on time of purchase (as in telephones). If you use at night when less are using it, you pay less. Only when the internet's data is metered like this, will we be able to get past these issues.
It's completely different when -YOU- use it. What if advertisers were allowed to remotely turn on your TV so you could watch an advertisement, then you had to wait for it to finish before you could turn it off again.
There's a fine line between you using something intentionally, and someone else forcing you to use something.
- However, data transmission SHOULD NOT be considered as long as you're paying the correct price for the bandwidth (perferrably per K-packet).
TOS explicitly states 'NO SPAM'. Break the TOS, you lose the contract.
-"You cannot (or should not be able to) force a company to do business with you if they don't want to."
--- I believe that isn't the case when the company is a monopoly, and possibly discriminating against you on speech. Yes, it could get that nasty.
Wrong. A company is not obligated to do business with you for any reason whatsoever, save religious or sexual discrimination. My dad owns a store; if somebody walks in that my dad doesn't like, he can tell them to leave, no explanation necessary, AS LONG AS there is no religious or sexual discrimination.
---"If Qwest sees that they are losing customers because they provide internet access to you, they have a fiduciary duty to terminate their business relationship with you."
--Does the same analogy hold true for the snail mail industry? NO. The spam idiots pay for the media, and pay for postage to my house. I just toss it away. Some are crafty and make it look like legit-like bills. Some promise prizes. It all goes to the shredder. My point is, if they pay through the nose for constand bandwidth, give them what they asked.
Except that you're not paying to receive snail mail. You -do- pay for bandwidth. Additionally, spammers generally don't go through legitimate methods of sending mail. They go to through multiple open relays, spoof return addresses, etc, which ends up causing -OTHER- companies bandwidth, and hence, money, and can often result in unintentional DOS attacks.
If he wants to spend the money to send spam, let him.
Fine, when it stops costing me money. Ever heard of metered bandwidth? His constitutional right to freedom of speech ends when I have to pay for it.
Exactly, you hit it right on the head. Beliefs are worthless. Praying to Jesus to make you better is simply a placebo effect to make you think you're going to get better.
It's all in the head. Some people need something to believe in, to create hope, because they are too weak-minded to do it themselves. Hence, religion.
Generally speaking, beliefs are worthless, as long as you are strong-willed enough to meet your goals on your own.
You go through all the trouble to develop a program to be used as a PVR in a computer; you give it out for free so anybody can use it, and ask for only that they do the same when the make it better. Then somebody comes along, takes your work, modifies it, and sells it, claiming it be their own.
Tip: Not everything is GPL. Those that that aren't should have written from scratch, or from licensed code. According to the story, Echostar used GPL'ed code, and hence, are required to, by the GPL license, to GPL their code.
What if this was proprietary code that they took and used? I believe you'd have a different view then, because it's generally called "IP Theft." Keven Mitnick served years in jail for something similar, and he wasn't even getting any financial benefit.
Well, guess what? If they don't GPL their code, they violated copyright. Plian and simple.
So what's so new about this gadget?
/. just heard about it.
Microsoft? Not hacker-friendly? What is this world coming to?
I get the impression you're trying to say that Microsoft doesn't work well with hackers; but I beg to differ:
If it wasn't for Microsoft, we hackers wouldn't have anything to hack.
I've been kinda following the Gnome2 prereleases, and it's nice. Glad to hear about the save dialog bugfix.
But some others:
1) The old volume control applet was way nicer than the current one, any possibility of it coming back?
2) I know the Gnome2 applet API is not backwards compatible to the old one. How hard would it be to port a Gnome1 applet to a Gnome2 applet, and when will some docs appear? (Specifically looking into porting the Gaim applet, and some others I can't use anymore)
I think that's it for now...
besides that, good f*g job!
Gnomes are hard working little creatures. They are sworn enemies of the Troll race, and it their duty to kill all Trolls upon sight.
Gnomes work hard, fast, and well. What they create not only shows pure power and eliteness, but also their artistic integrity.
KDE on the other hand stands for K00l D3mon1c E133t. The KDE tribe are the "script-kiddies", the "hacks", in the Lunix Empire. They try to look good, and that is their only objective. While they do succeed on some fronts, they fail miserably on others.
All in all, the KDE's are the George Bush's, wheras the Gnomes are the Alfred Hoffmans.
--
That said, it's just a joke, both are truly kickass, but, IMHO, I prefer Gnome (although recently moving to Fluxbox)....
Judgement Day.
Jesus is coming; everyone look busy!
One thing it went over was that people did not like the idea of GPS being always enabled on their phones, so what's happening is that phones will only enable GPS when 911 is dialed or the user hits a "I AM HERE" button, or the phone will have an option to disable GPS altogether.
RTFA.
I wouldn't mind being flashed every month.
Actually, I wouldn't even mind being flashed every day.
will be featuring different advertisements?
How nice.
The good news: You aren't suffering from paranoia
The bad news: They really are out to get you.
Of course, there's a lot of people who claim that information like this should not be released because of the damage it can cause. Yes, I agree. The people erleasing the information should have better judgement; BUT the people should not be arrested either.
Let me explain:
There's also a lot of people who claim guns should be illegal; I beg to differ (and this is an easier analogy).
Criminals will get guns regardless of whether they're legal or not. Most criminals don't even get guns legitimately; they're usually stolen from gun shops, other people, or bought from gun shows, where they don't have to follow the 7-day laws. Either way, they're acquired through the black market. Criminals (or at least intelligent criminals) don't just go out and buy assault rifles, because they know they can be traced.
If guns were criminalized, all it'll do is prevent legitimate owners from purchasing them for self defense. Now our problem is the personality of this country (the states) where crime runs rampant, the punishment doesn't make sense (I'd get more time for trafficking weed than killing someone), so people don't really have a reason to act responsibly.
In effect, if someone really wants to derail a train, they -will- find out; however, people who know should show enough responsibility to not tell everybody, as it can easily become some twisted game for a bunch of teenagers. As they've obviously shown, they don't have that responsibility, and of course, the government wants to punish them.
What it comes down to is we need to reevaluate our moral responsibilites, and keep the government out of it...
I dunno, I think I'm just rambling now, but it sense (to me) at one point....
I'll accept his statement that both are equally secure, especially because it's 90% based on the administrator. The difference is however, an open-source bug has many more eyes upon the code, and hence can be fixed a lot easier. Also, (though this doesn't pertain to most closed-source products) for programs that were written to be platform-independent, all the fix needs to be is a small .diff file, for the administrators who want to be as secure as possible, and the official builds and packages can be released in appropriate time.
The other great thing about OS is you -yourself- can fix the bug. No, not everyone is a kernel-hacker, but theres many bugs in small programs too.
IE: Not too long after I had first installed linux, I found out I couldn't play a certain DVD with any DVD player (Ogle, MPlayer, Xine, etc) although they played all of the others ones perfectly. The program was libdvdread (I believe) was dying on a failed (and completely unnecessary) assert(). So I opened up the sources, commented that line, recompiled, and wa-la, I could watch it now.
So, yeah, there will always be bugs; some OS products may even have more because they're made by people in their spare time (ie: apps like Ogle); but regardless, because there's many more eyes on it, bugs can (and generally are) fixed a lot quicker....
it's fixed
Wrong. A program not crashing when there's an error is more destructive than a program crashing when there's an error.
Why?
Because then they give out incorrect data, and in the case of servers, become vulnerable to security exploits. A DOS attack is much less dangerous than a root-exploit, and if a program continues running even after an error has occurred, it is much, much easier to exploit.
And all programs can crash, regardless of what language they're written in. Good programs crash cleanly AS SOON AS an unrecoverable error is discovered.
Speaking of which, why not name what language you're talking about?
take for example, this program, which displays the number*2:
int main() {
int i;
cin >> i;
cout mult_by_two(i);
}
int mult_by_two(int x) {
return x * 3;
}
It's not going to crash, and it'll compile fine, but it's plainly --wrong--. You can -not- create a language which prevents bad coding, until you create a system which can interface your computer with your f*cking head.
is like creating a car that doesn't crash.
Oh wait, you can do that; it just means it won't run.
So I think it explains itself.
you're a bunch of immature mornons ;)
the middle 'n' should be an 'm'. No harm done, however,