You can filter out ALL the spam and reduce your bandwidth entirely by blocking ALL email. Your problem is solved, eh? But at what expense?
Nice strawman. Like I said in my initial post, the ratio is quite good: 19 million spams blocked, maybe 30-40 false positive complaints over that period of time. It's a price we find quite acceptable. Frankly, I wish UPS was anywhere near that good at delivering my packages.
If the phone company or package services had your attitude they'd quickly go out of business. The only reason you haven't is that people have been caught off guard by new technology-- it's only a matter of time IMHO before email services become essentially (if not specifically) common carriers. Net Neutrality is a step in that direction, but even without it the essentials of common carrier status for email is inevitable. You cannot run businesses without reliable email services for everyone, which unfortunately is going to include some form of legalized (non-fraudulent) SPAM once all the dust clears.
Well, first off with your analogy is flawed - I'm not the Phone company or the package service, I'm the company mail room or corporate PBX.
Secondly, the're fundamentally different for economic reasons. Junk mail and telemarketers are both self limiting in that there is a significant cost associated with bothering me, and that keeps the crap to reasonable levels. I've never received so much junk mail that I've been unable to find the good stuff. I'd probably give up on email and go back to calling people if I didn't have spam filtering on my email account - if I turn spam filtering off the crap out numbers the good stuff literally 20 to 1.
Thirdly, we've already been doing the same thing on Telephone lines for years. Screening calls with answering machines, caller ID and secretaries, and more recently with a federal Do-Not-Call list. An approach that unfortunately doesn't work nearly as well on the internet.
Can you avoid the junk mail in your snail mail box? Advertising pointed at you at the grocery store? SPAM is not confined to the internet, and in fact has been around longer than the internet has, only the term for it is new. It makes money, and is perfectly legal in many forms, even though many of us would just as soon see it disappear. Go ahead, postpone the inevitable and concoct some hackneyed argument that email SPAM is somehow different, if it makes you feel any better.
All of it? No. But generally if you ask to be removed form lists, snail mail companies will comply. Likewise, you can talk to the USPS and ask to be removed from lists for saturation mailings.
I'm not sure what "the inevitable" is that you think I'm avoiding. If you mean treating e-mail as a common carrier service with spam filtering being banned, you're even more divorced from reality than I thought you were at the start of this thread. The only US law regarding SPAM specifically allows email providers to filter spam however they'd like. Morever, aside from a few fanatics who think that the right to have your email delivered appears in the 3 1/2 ammendment, most people WANT spam filtering. We allow users to opt out if they want. Noone ever has, including those with false positives.
I hate spam even more than you, but for different reasons-- not only do I hate getting all that crap in my inbox and wasting everyone's bandwidth, what I hate the most is that incompetent attempts to deal with it are decreasing email reliability. Incompetence much like the way the US gov has been dealing with terrorism-- the bull-in-a-china-shop-shotgun-approach that in their myopia may help with a few specific problems but makes many others significantly worse...
Well, there certainly people out there pursuing incompetent strategies for blocking spam. Spamhaus isn't one of them. In my experience they're quite professional and accurate. Spamhaus isn't SPEWS (Which isn't really incompetent either...They're
It's a "nuisance lawsuit" if the company is in fact spamming, but in any case I think the suit could keep overzealous spam filtering in check. Any spam filtering company that is capable of producing false positives should be subject to such suits, as their "technology" is contributing to the unreliability of legitimate email and is IMHO unacceptable. Better to let a few million extra spams through than to risk blocking a single legitimate email, and if this is a sign the court would support that position, it is a Good Thing(TM)...
You don't think false positives are acceptable? Fine. Don't spam filter on your servers and don't use a mail provider that does it for you. Where you, or the government, get off telling me what me and my users are going to do with our mail I'm not sure. My organization chose to use Spamhaus - We've found them to be quite reliable. Spamhaus doesn't magically tap into "the tubes" somewhere and filter email out of the internet - they list people who have been reported spamming and WE choose not to accept mail from them because of it.
We filter around 85-90% of incoming messages, and have blocked over 19 million messages in the last year. Assuming it takes a second per message to evaluate and JHD, thats over two and a half man years we've saved dealing with spam. Not to mention the potential hostile work environment problems you have for employees who are offended by advertisements for horses fucking school girl nuns and suggestions that they need larger breasts. If we had to give up every form of spam filtering that could possibly ever result in a false positive due to the threat of lawsuits, we'd probably have to stop using email all together.
Sure - and by this reasoning, the telco's and ISP's *can* charge variable rates for access to *their* networks. It belongs to them, they made it.
ISPs and Telcos play by a different set of rules. They've been granted a whole bunch of special privleges by the government (I certainly didn't give them permission to put phone lines through my front yard, and I'm quite certain that the government isn't going to let another telco come along and install a whole second set). You'll notice the only ISPs that we care about Net Neutrality with are the broadband ISPs who own the cable in my front yard - Nobody cares if AOL gives their own services preferential treatment, because you can just switch to another dialup ISP.
In the same way, switching to a different search engine is trivial - I just type a different address into the bar and use MSN or Ask.com or altavista. Google is the biggest fish in the pond, but they're hardly the only one, so lacking the special Monopoly status that the telcos and a certain OS manufacturer have, there is no reason to restrict what they can do with their stuff.
Sure, our town is in a budget crunch. Well, more like we have a six million dollar deficit, but there's other reasons for that. I've often wondered why places like Florida don't bury their lines as they suffer so many storm-related disruptions.
Florida is an extra special fun case when it comes to burying power lines - Large sections of Florida have a water table that is only 3-4 feet below the surface.
Since I work in academia, let me state this for the record: The cost of textbooks is not a result of the publisher's desire to screw the student (at least not in the biological and physical sciences), it is due to the free-market ownership of individual photographs or charts, which must be paid for by the publisher for the right to publish it.
Sure. Thats why I just coughed up $120 for a new edition of my statistics book which contains no third party pictures or charts whatsoever, right? And why theres a new edition of the Calc textbook that we use here every 2 damn years?
Google has a near monopoly. Search engine compete for customers on search results. Google wins here.
50% and less of searches is a pretty strange definition of monopoly. The numbers vary pretty widely, but I've yet to seen anyone claim over 60% for google.
They only do this in parts of town that have a high percentage of racial minorities. Seriously, go to different stores in a major city and see for yourself. In the suburban white areas, no stores do the door check thing. It's basically just a legal way to racially profile.
I've seen this done by several Wal-Mart/Sams' Clubs that are in lily-white communities. Not everything is racial.
I think people who criticise the rampant "consumerism" of the holidays are short-sighted hypocrites who fail to realize that the only reason our quality of life is possible is precisely because of said consumerism. I'm sure you already know that the reason it's called "Black Friday" is because it's the time of year when retailers finally move out of the red and into the profitable black column on their balance sheets. But, don't you find it a little frightening that it doesn't happen until late November? Don't you think that our society is balancing on a pretty precarious economic cliff if we operate in a deficit for 11 months of the year, finally turning profitable in the last and final month?
Maybe if people didn't spend the first four months of the year paying off christmas debt it wouldn't take so long for stores to be profitable? It's not like the money is going to disappear - they're gonna spend it one way or another. Few people need a _reason_ to spend recklessly.
Lets count the differences outlined in the article: 1. apply security and recommended patches on a simulated monthly release basis; Is there anything out there equivalent to windows update? Windows wins this one
Up2date, apt-get, yum, yast. In fact, I'd say that up2date combined with the Redhat Network service you get with Redhat Enterprise Linux is actually significantly more functional.
I can get myself a very nice bicycle or laser printer for free through Amex because of their rewards program. I put all my groceries, gas and business travel on that card and it pays back in a nice way. Having to pay it off at the end of the month also helps to keep my spending in line.
Yeah, but the guy I responded to said that he couldn't understand why Menards wouldn't take AmEx. And the reason would be that Menards doesn't really want to pay for your bicycle or laser printer.:)
Re:[OT] Re:How to boycott?
on
Bad Day To Be Sony
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Why Menard's won't do it is beyond me. Home Depot is always around the corner, and we're finally getting Lowe's here as well, in the Midwest.
Because American Express rewards their customers by charging much higher merchant fees than their competition.
(disclaimer: I'm a Christian, and I have no problem with creationism as science, if you do, you probably don't understand the term "science")
Creationism along side science? Sure. Creationism _as_ science? Well, someone here doesn't know what science means, but unless the science you're talking about is anthropology, it's you. Science relies on testable, falsifiable predictions. Creationism does not provide these.
FPS doesn't suck on consoles. I'm sure you hate Halo 2, but there is a reason it's sold over 5 million copies.
FPS sucks on consoles. Halo 2 has sold a lot of copies because it's the best FPS available for a console. This does not in anyway negate the suckage of FPS on consoles.
Intelligent design? As far as I know, nobody has actually refuted "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe.
Five minutes with google will take care of that for you. Hell, the second hit from typing in the title is a pretty good peice from the talk.origins FAQ.
These things are horribly over-engineered. Not that it is a bad thing they are proving so resilliant, but we're now at 8x the "designed" life span. In my mind, that means they could have probably built it half as robust and still been outstanding pieces of machinery(and alot less expensive).
Thats a problem with your mind, not with NASA's strategy. In short, the actual construction costs of the rovers are a very small portion of the cost of a mission of this nature. Skimping on the construction isn't going to save significantly on design costs, nor is it going to reduce the cost of flinging it halfway across the solar system and monitoring it on the way.
What you call "Over-engineering" likely only increased to cost of the project by a couple of percent at most, and greatly improved the chances of success, avoiding the necessity of paying all of the overhead costs _again_ to lauch another one because this one plowed into the ground.
Penny wise, pound foolish as my Grandma would say.:)
And where is it stored? ~/.app? ~/.app/.settings?/etc/app?/etc/app/settings?/etc/app/settings.xml?
Global settings go in/etc. Per-User settings go under the home directory. The default per-user settings are stored in/usr/share and copied in the first time the program is run. Wow, that was hard wasn't it?
See the way Apple has done this. Global app settings in/Library, personal App settings in ~user/Library. When I used to do desktop support (50/50 mix of OS X and Windows) all we had to do when we moved a user to a different machine was image it and copy their home directory. Easy as pie, takes about 10 minutes of my time. Wow, once again it was really hard to answer that "where does it go" question.
Gotta save a users settings when moving them to a different windows install (usually because the students laptop was so spyware ridden it was easier to just reformant)? Let the nightmare begin!
Trying to reinstall a hosed application that won't uninstall properly? Lets just see you try to track down all those registry keys. On a Mac or Linux you just remove the rc file or plist.
And what is the format of said INI file?
Once again, see Apple's plists. XML all the way, with tools to manipulate them if you don't like your text editor.
And what do the permissions need to be for the app to run? And what do the permissions need to be for a sane security approach.
Users their own config settings. If you want to restrict access to global config settings, just don't give them access to the config file. If you don't want them to run the program, don't give them read and execute permissions on the app itself. There are other operating systems out the besides windows, and they've already solved these problems. In the case of Unix, about 20 years ago. I've done Unix, Apple and Microsoft desktop administration, and while the Unix and Apple solutions do have a few quirks (Apple's system doesn't really have many), the Registry is by far the most broken and the biggest PITA.
So be your own mechanic! It never ceases to amaze me how gullible people are when it comes to repairs on, well, anything. Computers, washing machines, cars - they're all incredibly simple from a technical viewpoint, but the punters queue in their droves to pay other people to 'fix' them. And then they complain when they get 'ripped off'.
Being your own mechanic tends to require things that not everyone (particularly the Slashdot demographic, which tends to involve a lot of college students) have. Like a Garage.
C# doesn't require that you have version 1.4.01_04 of the runtime installed for one app, 1.4.01_03 installed for a second, and 1.5.02_01 for a third.
Java is an awesome language, but the runtime-version-specific nature of *every* Java app we have at work ruins it in my mind.
Quit using the Microsoft Java tools. Microsoft intentionally busted them to poison the well for Java. There is a reason that Sun went to a lot of legal effort to make Microsoft quit shipping them.
On the newegg link they list the MTBF as 1 million hours. Google tells me that that is about 114 years. How can it have such high mtbf? Is that newegg just not having correct data or is there something special about these drives (or are they designed to be "used" less)?
Easy: You, like most people, don't know what MTBF means. MTBF is only meaningful in context with the expected lifespan of the device. This is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 years, or about 43,800 hours. Essentially, what the manufacturer is saying is "Based on some data, we estimate that if you run x number of these drives, the average time between failures will be 1,000,000/x hours, up until the expected lifespan of the drive, at which point all bets are off"
For computer hardware this is always some sort of extrapolated estimate, since they have of course not actually been testing the drive for it's expected lifespan, or it would be obsolete by the time they released it.
Imagine if Wal-Mart decided they were going to tack on a $0.50 'electricity surcharge' to cover the cost of electricity they pay to light their store. Or what about a 'paper surcharge' to cover the cost of the paper your receipt was printed on?
Ummm...You mean exactly the way that Sales Tax appears on my receipt every time I shop there?
Running in prefork MPM is fine for the most part, but I really wish perchild would get off the ground so that PHP scripts won't be all running as the same user. Now if only all of PHP's modules were thread safe...
suPHP will take care of that for you. Well, the user bit, not the thread safety bit.
You do know that XP in general is more stable than a Win2k workstation right? You do know that XP in general is faster than Win2k right?
That has not been my observation. Even with the playschool crap turned off, I noticed a significant slow down on a couple of my machines after "upgrading" to WinXP. Network performance in particular suffered.
Bzzrt. Everyone who doesn't quite understand relativity gets this one wrong. Right answer, wrong reason. The acceleration isn't important. The velocity is.
Velocity causes the time and distance dilation yes, but the accelleration is what breaks the symmetry between the two.
While twin two is heading away from twin one, you can't say who's older - From Twin One's perspective Twin Two is aging slowly, and From Twin Two's perspective Twin One is aging slowly. It's just as legitimate to say that Twin Two is stationary and everything else is moving around him. It's the fact that he _turns around and comes back_ that breaks the symmetry between the two frames of reference and allows you to say that he is in fact the younger one.
You've covered the part about how the second twin is able to see himself covering the distance in that time, but ignored the fact that while he is not accelerating, the frames of reference are relative and that you can just as easily say the _other_ twin is aging slowly. In short, you ignored the principle of relativity.:)
You can't get that backwards. However, it depends on which twin you call stationary. If you called the rocket stationary, then it would seem the twin that stayed home would be young.
Bzzrt. Wrong answer. Motion is relative, acceleration is not. Rocket Twin accelerates and decellerates to leave and come back. He will always be younger at the end.
Slashdot Mirror
Nice strawman. Like I said in my initial post, the ratio is quite good: 19 million spams blocked, maybe 30-40 false positive complaints over that period of time. It's a price we find quite acceptable. Frankly, I wish UPS was anywhere near that good at delivering my packages.
If the phone company or package services had your attitude they'd quickly go out of business. The only reason you haven't is that people have been caught off guard by new technology-- it's only a matter of time IMHO before email services become essentially (if not specifically) common carriers. Net Neutrality is a step in that direction, but even without it the essentials of common carrier status for email is inevitable. You cannot run businesses without reliable email services for everyone, which unfortunately is going to include some form of legalized (non-fraudulent) SPAM once all the dust clears.
Well, first off with your analogy is flawed - I'm not the Phone company or the package service, I'm the company mail room or corporate PBX.
Secondly, the're fundamentally different for economic reasons. Junk mail and telemarketers are both self limiting in that there is a significant cost associated with bothering me, and that keeps the crap to reasonable levels. I've never received so much junk mail that I've been unable to find the good stuff. I'd probably give up on email and go back to calling people if I didn't have spam filtering on my email account - if I turn spam filtering off the crap out numbers the good stuff literally 20 to 1.
Thirdly, we've already been doing the same thing on Telephone lines for years. Screening calls with answering machines, caller ID and secretaries, and more recently with a federal Do-Not-Call list. An approach that unfortunately doesn't work nearly as well on the internet.
Can you avoid the junk mail in your snail mail box? Advertising pointed at you at the grocery store? SPAM is not confined to the internet, and in fact has been around longer than the internet has, only the term for it is new. It makes money, and is perfectly legal in many forms, even though many of us would just as soon see it disappear. Go ahead, postpone the inevitable and concoct some hackneyed argument that email SPAM is somehow different, if it makes you feel any better.
All of it? No. But generally if you ask to be removed form lists, snail mail companies will comply. Likewise, you can talk to the USPS and ask to be removed from lists for saturation mailings.
I'm not sure what "the inevitable" is that you think I'm avoiding. If you mean treating e-mail as a common carrier service with spam filtering being banned, you're even more divorced from reality than I thought you were at the start of this thread. The only US law regarding SPAM specifically allows email providers to filter spam however they'd like. Morever, aside from a few fanatics who think that the right to have your email delivered appears in the 3 1/2 ammendment, most people WANT spam filtering. We allow users to opt out if they want. Noone ever has, including those with false positives.
I hate spam even more than you, but for different reasons-- not only do I hate getting all that crap in my inbox and wasting everyone's bandwidth, what I hate the most is that incompetent attempts to deal with it are decreasing email reliability. Incompetence much like the way the US gov has been dealing with terrorism-- the bull-in-a-china-shop-shotgun-approach that in their myopia may help with a few specific problems but makes many others significantly worse...
Well, there certainly people out there pursuing incompetent strategies for blocking spam. Spamhaus isn't one of them. In my experience they're quite professional and accurate. Spamhaus isn't SPEWS (Which isn't really incompetent either...They're
You don't think false positives are acceptable? Fine. Don't spam filter on your servers and don't use a mail provider that does it for you. Where you, or the government, get off telling me what me and my users are going to do with our mail I'm not sure. My organization chose to use Spamhaus - We've found them to be quite reliable. Spamhaus doesn't magically tap into "the tubes" somewhere and filter email out of the internet - they list people who have been reported spamming and WE choose not to accept mail from them because of it.
We filter around 85-90% of incoming messages, and have blocked over 19 million messages in the last year. Assuming it takes a second per message to evaluate and JHD, thats over two and a half man years we've saved dealing with spam. Not to mention the potential hostile work environment problems you have for employees who are offended by advertisements for horses fucking school girl nuns and suggestions that they need larger breasts. If we had to give up every form of spam filtering that could possibly ever result in a false positive due to the threat of lawsuits, we'd probably have to stop using email all together.
ISPs and Telcos play by a different set of rules. They've been granted a whole bunch of special privleges by the government (I certainly didn't give them permission to put phone lines through my front yard, and I'm quite certain that the government isn't going to let another telco come along and install a whole second set). You'll notice the only ISPs that we care about Net Neutrality with are the broadband ISPs who own the cable in my front yard - Nobody cares if AOL gives their own services preferential treatment, because you can just switch to another dialup ISP.
In the same way, switching to a different search engine is trivial - I just type a different address into the bar and use MSN or Ask.com or altavista. Google is the biggest fish in the pond, but they're hardly the only one, so lacking the special Monopoly status that the telcos and a certain OS manufacturer have, there is no reason to restrict what they can do with their stuff.
Florida is an extra special fun case when it comes to burying power lines - Large sections of Florida have a water table that is only 3-4 feet below the surface.
Sure. Thats why I just coughed up $120 for a new edition of my statistics book which contains no third party pictures or charts whatsoever, right? And why theres a new edition of the Calc textbook that we use here every 2 damn years?
50% and less of searches is a pretty strange definition of monopoly. The numbers vary pretty widely, but I've yet to seen anyone claim over 60% for google.
2 156431
http://searchenginewatch.com/reports/article.php/
you're wrong. symantec anti virus which is avaliable on google pack has no comparable software on osX
Nope, no equivalent product on OS X. Of course, anti virus software is pretty much totally unecessary on OS X...
I've seen this done by several Wal-Mart/Sams' Clubs that are in lily-white communities. Not everything is racial.
Maybe if people didn't spend the first four months of the year paying off christmas debt it wouldn't take so long for stores to be profitable? It's not like the money is going to disappear - they're gonna spend it one way or another. Few people need a _reason_ to spend recklessly.
1. apply security and recommended patches on a simulated monthly release basis;
Is there anything out there equivalent to windows update? Windows wins this one
Up2date, apt-get, yum, yast. In fact, I'd say that up2date combined with the Redhat Network service you get with Redhat Enterprise Linux is actually significantly more functional.
Yeah, but the guy I responded to said that he couldn't understand why Menards wouldn't take AmEx. And the reason would be that Menards doesn't really want to pay for your bicycle or laser printer. :)
Because American Express rewards their customers by charging much higher merchant fees than their competition.
1 2-22-amex_x.htm
http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/general/2004-
Creationism along side science? Sure. Creationism _as_ science? Well, someone here doesn't know what science means, but unless the science you're talking about is anthropology, it's you. Science relies on testable, falsifiable predictions. Creationism does not provide these.
FPS sucks on consoles. Halo 2 has sold a lot of copies because it's the best FPS available for a console. This does not in anyway negate the suckage of FPS on consoles.
Five minutes with google will take care of that for you. Hell, the second hit from typing in the title is a pretty good peice from the talk.origins FAQ.
Thats a problem with your mind, not with NASA's strategy. In short, the actual construction costs of the rovers are a very small portion of the cost of a mission of this nature. Skimping on the construction isn't going to save significantly on design costs, nor is it going to reduce the cost of flinging it halfway across the solar system and monitoring it on the way.
What you call "Over-engineering" likely only increased to cost of the project by a couple of percent at most, and greatly improved the chances of success, avoiding the necessity of paying all of the overhead costs _again_ to lauch another one because this one plowed into the ground.
Penny wise, pound foolish as my Grandma would say. :)
Global settings go in /etc. Per-User settings go under the home directory. The default per-user settings are stored in /usr/share and copied in the first time the program is run. Wow, that was hard wasn't it?
See the way Apple has done this. Global app settings in /Library, personal App settings in ~user/Library. When I used to do desktop support (50/50 mix of OS X and Windows) all we had to do when we moved a user to a different machine was image it and copy their home directory. Easy as pie, takes about 10 minutes of my time. Wow, once again it was really hard to answer that "where does it go" question.
Gotta save a users settings when moving them to a different windows install (usually because the students laptop was so spyware ridden it was easier to just reformant)? Let the nightmare begin!
Trying to reinstall a hosed application that won't uninstall properly? Lets just see you try to track down all those registry keys. On a Mac or Linux you just remove the rc file or plist.
And what is the format of said INI file?
Once again, see Apple's plists. XML all the way, with tools to manipulate them if you don't like your text editor.
And what do the permissions need to be for the app to run? And what do the permissions need to be for a sane security approach.
Users their own config settings. If you want to restrict access to global config settings, just don't give them access to the config file. If you don't want them to run the program, don't give them read and execute permissions on the app itself. There are other operating systems out the besides windows, and they've already solved these problems. In the case of Unix, about 20 years ago. I've done Unix, Apple and Microsoft desktop administration, and while the Unix and Apple solutions do have a few quirks (Apple's system doesn't really have many), the Registry is by far the most broken and the biggest PITA.
Being your own mechanic tends to require things that not everyone (particularly the Slashdot demographic, which tends to involve a lot of college students) have. Like a Garage.
C# doesn't require that you have version 1.4.01_04 of the runtime installed for one app, 1.4.01_03 installed for a second, and 1.5.02_01 for a third.
Java is an awesome language, but the runtime-version-specific nature of *every* Java app we have at work ruins it in my mind.
Quit using the Microsoft Java tools. Microsoft intentionally busted them to poison the well for Java. There is a reason that Sun went to a lot of legal effort to make Microsoft quit shipping them.
Easy: You, like most people, don't know what MTBF means. MTBF is only meaningful in context with the expected lifespan of the device. This is probably somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 years, or about 43,800 hours. Essentially, what the manufacturer is saying is "Based on some data, we estimate that if you run x number of these drives, the average time between failures will be 1,000,000/x hours, up until the expected lifespan of the drive, at which point all bets are off"
For computer hardware this is always some sort of extrapolated estimate, since they have of course not actually been testing the drive for it's expected lifespan, or it would be obsolete by the time they released it.
Ummm...You mean exactly the way that Sales Tax appears on my receipt every time I shop there?
Running in prefork MPM is fine for the most part, but I really wish perchild would get off the ground so that PHP scripts won't be all running as the same user. Now if only all of PHP's modules were thread safe...
suPHP will take care of that for you. Well, the user bit, not the thread safety bit.
http://www.suphp.org/Home.html
That has not been my observation. Even with the playschool crap turned off, I noticed a significant slow down on a couple of my machines after "upgrading" to WinXP. Network performance in particular suffered.
Velocity causes the time and distance dilation yes, but the accelleration is what breaks the symmetry between the two.
While twin two is heading away from twin one, you can't say who's older - From Twin One's perspective Twin Two is aging slowly, and From Twin Two's perspective Twin One is aging slowly. It's just as legitimate to say that Twin Two is stationary and everything else is moving around him. It's the fact that he _turns around and comes back_ that breaks the symmetry between the two frames of reference and allows you to say that he is in fact the younger one.
You've covered the part about how the second twin is able to see himself covering the distance in that time, but ignored the fact that while he is not accelerating, the frames of reference are relative and that you can just as easily say the _other_ twin is aging slowly. In short, you ignored the principle of relativity. :)
Bzzrt. Wrong answer. Motion is relative, acceleration is not. Rocket Twin accelerates and decellerates to leave and come back. He will always be younger at the end.