I haven't been a "kid" in twenty years, thanks; and I'm using server 2003 because
a)it's a free eval b)it runs the games I want to play c)it runs the graphics programs I use c)it's setup with a better eye towards security than XP pro is
I am a "home user", which was indicated by my asking about a cable connection (were I asking about work, I would have used the appropriate terminology).
So, does this mean that if you are running Windows Server 2003 (eg the eval version, as I am) on a cable/dsl line you should just assume that you have been rooted?
Fucking harsh.
side note; would using something like outpoast firewall make any difference?
He's there because he can easily be "discredited". You'll notice that there is no-one who is both credible as well as high-profile who is saying anything "unflattering".
registering domain names is far from being a minor bureaucratic point; particularly when you consider that it is an issue that they have been more than vigorous in -demonstrating that they, themselves, do not see it as a trifle either.
As far as the netscape comparison goes; it still fits. In 95, Netscape looked strong and was kicking "all the right ass"; by 1998, it was sold to AOL.
Since the dot-com era is a vague memory now, I don't foresee anyone coming to bail out google when they fall on their face.
No one in 1995 could have foreseen netscape's crash and burn. Hopefully in 2004 experience has made (at least some of us) a touch smarter.
I'll go that far, given all of the time they've had; they've essentially botched the IPO. I mean, for fuck's sake,they've been going after people with google-alike names; it's not as if they're totally ignorant of domain squatters, etc.
It's done, stick a fork in it. Google has offically jumped the shark.
You sir have won the daily "Tool of the Industry" award by spouting their corporate spin and calling pirates thievs.
Are you going to have one sent around your desk too, or do you accept the corporate labeling of copyright infringers as "pirates" and only object to them being called "thieves"?
I disagree. This is an area where MS has full right to complain, and their complaint is valid. I think that MS appealing to the court of public opinion is a great oppertunity for OSS to correct the mistakes of its' core UNIX paradigm. The challenge for developers is to resist the temptation to cover their ears and shout "UNIX IS USER-FRIENDLY IT'S JUST PICKY WHO ITS' FRIENDS ARE" and instead publicly acknowlege its' (sendmail) shortcomings and show tangible results in addressing them.
1)by the time what you're proposing happens, the media will control all forms of education. So your "educated" consumer might not be educated the way you anticipate.
2)those consumers who are actually disgruntled will be (even more) marginalised than they are now, and their telling the media companies anything will be little more than a low wimper.
I'm sure a jury will have no problem finding you guilty. NOT so fast, there. I was snacking on twinkies and coffee; so clearly my violation of the "User Agrees To Preview Each Comment" clause of the slashdot EULA is not MY fault, but the fault of Hostess and Foldgers coffee.
Slashdot Mirror
in the fact that I've just been sitting on my gmail accounts and not actually using them?
Whether for reasons right, wrong or indifferent; Howard Dean has no credibility.
And it's the combination of credibility and visibility that I was addressing.
For whatever it's worth; this is the very first I've heard that about the microphone, etc.
I haven't been a "kid" in twenty years, thanks; and I'm using server 2003 because
a)it's a free eval
b)it runs the games I want to play
c)it runs the graphics programs I use
c)it's setup with a better eye towards security than XP pro is
I am a "home user", which was indicated by my asking about a cable connection (were I asking about work, I would have used the appropriate terminology).
So, does this mean that if you are running Windows Server 2003 (eg the eval version, as I am) on a cable/dsl line you should just assume that you have been rooted?
Fucking harsh.
side note; would using something like outpoast firewall make any difference?
Um..you were saying?
He's there because he can easily be "discredited". You'll notice that there is no-one who is both credible as well as high-profile who is saying anything "unflattering".
registering domain names is far from being a minor bureaucratic point; particularly when you consider that it is an issue that they have been more than vigorous in -demonstrating that they, themselves, do not see it as a trifle either.
As far as the netscape comparison goes; it still fits. In 95, Netscape looked strong and was kicking "all the right ass"; by 1998, it was sold to AOL.
Since the dot-com era is a vague memory now, I don't foresee anyone coming to bail out google when they fall on their face.
No one in 1995 could have foreseen netscape's crash and burn. Hopefully in 2004 experience has made (at least some of us) a touch smarter.
s/overwhelmind mindshare/overwhelming mindshare/g
And at one point netscape kicked the snot out of *their* competitors technically and also had an overwhelmind mindshare among the public.
And they went....? (free hint: they blazed the trail that google is now following).
I'll go that far, given all of the time they've had; they've essentially botched the IPO. I mean, for fuck's sake,they've been going after people with google-alike names; it's not as if they're totally ignorant of domain squatters, etc.
It's done, stick a fork in it. Google has offically jumped the shark.
You sir have won the daily "Tool of the Industry" award by spouting their corporate spin and calling pirates thievs.
Are you going to have one sent around your desk too, or do you accept the corporate labeling of copyright infringers as "pirates" and only object to them being called "thieves"?
Are there any alternatives for those of us on a crap-free diet?
theives stealing from theives; what sweet, sweet delicious irony!
and bookmarks.yahoo.com as well as notepad.yahoo.com
:(
I'm still waiting from them to come out with paintbrush.yahoo.com though.
Acutally, I use internet mail because it's more secure and spam-free than Outlook.
I disagree. This is an area where MS has full right to complain, and their complaint is valid. I think that MS appealing to the court of public opinion is a great oppertunity for OSS to correct the mistakes of its' core UNIX paradigm. The challenge for developers is to resist the temptation to cover their ears and shout "UNIX IS USER-FRIENDLY IT'S JUST PICKY WHO ITS' FRIENDS ARE" and instead publicly acknowlege its' (sendmail) shortcomings and show tangible results in addressing them.
Christ, you went to medical school just to learn that?!?!?
It doesn't work (that well) for netscape, why would it work for Aiiiiyeeee?
no popup-blockers? no flash-click-to-view? Other than the fact I'm on XP, is there any compelling reason to switch over?
I believe when I say, "que sera, sera". We all know this is going to go through; enjoy your already-limited freedoms while they last.
1)by the time what you're proposing happens, the media will control all forms of education. So your "educated" consumer might not be educated the way you anticipate.
2)those consumers who are actually disgruntled will be (even more) marginalised than they are now, and their telling the media companies anything will be little more than a low wimper.
We're fucked, full stop, end of story.
I'm sure a jury will have no problem finding you guilty.
NOT so fast, there. I was snacking on twinkies and coffee; so clearly my violation of the "User Agrees To Preview Each Comment" clause of the slashdot EULA is not MY fault, but the fault of Hostess and Foldgers coffee.
Apparently not, since the posts are all deleted.
Incidently, here in america, we use litigation for everything. Just the morning I used litigation to open a mayonnaise jar that was wouldn't open.
No "internet comunity" was involved.
Ah. So you're saying he was getting the spam via esp then?
They had to exhaust all of the unreasonable options first.