I just thought it was being a little _too_ fair to Shifman. They didn't mention at all how he threatened the people involved, nor how he started it all. Also not mentioned are his letters rudely demanding that the site's listing be removed from all search engines and to stop being "hosted" by google (he got confused about google's caching feature). Although both sides of the story are told, it seems to me that Shifman's side is portrayed in a much better light.
The Chicago Tribune seems to represent Shifman as a guy who's been persecuted by the devilish anti-spam community. Um, hello? Read the log of emails sent back and forth. Shifman is abusive, insulting and, quite frankly, stupid. He seems ignorant of any legal knowledge whatsoever; threatening to sue all involved in critisising him for simply reporting a piece of spam _he_ wrote.
"..if most people were intelligent and responsible, but personally I don't feel like accessing it at some point in the woods during a camping trip and seeing that someone took a shit where I'm pitching my tent."
But surely that would be good, as then you would know not to pitch your tent there?:)
Why would a singularity be unreasonable? Just because it sounds like it's wrong doesn't make it so. Just look at Quantum Physics (I'm sure many have made this point before me:).
Sometimes things just "are". Why should there necessarily be any law of the universe that rules out infinities?
Uh, hello? You're not being/forced/ to use Slashdot, are you?! You're getting this for/free/ for God's sake - how in the hell can you possibly fault CmdrTaco?!
Lacky: I thought you'd like to see this sir?
Bush: A printout of an email?
Lacky: Yes sir, but look!
Bush: My GOD! A/. Karma of 47?!
Lacky: We've checked. It's genuine sir.
Bush: I'll present this to congress immediately! If all goes well, we can have these proposals in written law by next week!
Lacky: Yes sir, Mr President!
Ok, I know Bush wouldn't be that smart, and having congress approve anything in one week is asking for a miracle. But *apart* from that, the concept's sound!
It would have interesting applications for movies and theatres. Actors could "fly" about, and producers wouldn't have to worry about people seeing the wires.
Hey, if you had some kickass, nuclear probes, what would you do? Sure, it would be neat to have a look about the solar system, but it would be even more fun to blow 'em up!
Scientist 1: Hey, wanna crash a probe into a moon?
Scientist 2: Is is nuclear powered?
Scientist 1: Hell yeah!
Scientist 2: Then what are we waitin' for?
Scientist 3: Wheee! There it goes! Asteriods ain't the only things in this system that can make funky craters!
Probe: Boooom!!
I mean, these guys have monitored all this boring data for decades - I think they're entitled to blow some shit up now and again.
Hey! You're right! How could we have progressed so much in 10 years?! Hell, I'll ignore the fact that it is purely a matter of the/size/ of the rocket and not the technology as to whether the moon could be reached, and that mathematics that show that the current Saturn 5 could reach the moon quite easily, and that technology in the 10 years from 1990-2000 saw the increase of computing power a hundredfold.
Ok, so I know you're a troll but think about it. The Saturn 5 exists, and if you don't believe that go up and touch it for yourself. Secondly, work out how much fuel it carries and whether it could get to the moon using a simple, direct path. And hey, it can! So maybe the moon landing isn't so unbelievable after all?
Since it hasn't happened yet, I would say it was pretty unlikely:)
But if it did happen, then we would likely die. The more dimensions gravity acts within, the more the gravitational force increases. I suppose it would be possible to calculate what would happen if this were the case, but being the squishy, frail forms of life that we are, I wouldn't put much hope in our survival. Most likely we would burn up as Earth approached the Sun.
Warwick University hasn't got any restrictions that I know of. The net's fast and allows telneting, file-sharing, and irc. Everything I've tried in fact. The DNS is a bit buggy, but that's gotten better.
Karma points aside, the moderation system is meant to give posts that are useful to others a higher rating. This has been a very imformative article to me as I can be bothered with the registration. Just because it's cut and past doesn't mean it's not of value. Can we forget about Karma for one minute and instead try and moderate posts based on how useful they are?
Gak! A Linux Zealot! Just claiming that Linux is the best in all respects is stupid to say the least. Only by attitudes seen in posts like the insightful one above (hey, the moderators have spoken!) can Linux possibly hope to advance. Sure, Microsoft does a lot of stuff wrong, but it also does some stuff right, and ignoring this just because you believes Linux is so good that Windows will never come close to beating it, only paves the way for the demise of our intrepid free OS.
I've used Linux for acouple of years now, every since Redhat 5.1 came out, and Windows has taken a back seat to my Linux From Scratch partition. The only reason I still keep Windows on my machine is to test out my site on IE, and to play all my favourite games. So I'm as much for Linux as anyone. But clinging onto the naive views that you seem to have is pointless. Yes Linux is a great OS, but does that really mean we can ignore the activities of our main competitor, Microsoft?
Look for stupid hair-styles. All boy bands are required by law to have at least one member with stupid-looking hair; you just have to associate hair-style with band name.
Still, it is far more common than it was 6 years ago, and has come a long way technologically. Quite a bit of embedded Linux is getting around as well, for instance the Tivo, so I wouldn't dismiss his claim altogether...
That said, Linux isn't as popular as Windows or MacOS, and may never be, but it is possible to live in a niche market. Linux is doing very well at the moment, despite its relatively small following, and I see no reason why it can't continue to do so. Linux may well benefit from money spent on it, but unlike its other competitors, it cannot go bankrupt either.
Slashdot Mirror
> We had no false positives.
But how could you tell?
I just thought it was being a little _too_ fair to Shifman. They didn't mention at all how he threatened the people involved, nor how he started it all. Also not mentioned are his letters rudely demanding that the site's listing be removed from all search engines and to stop being "hosted" by google (he got confused about google's caching feature). Although both sides of the story are told, it seems to me that Shifman's side is portrayed in a much better light.
The Chicago Tribune seems to represent Shifman as a guy who's been persecuted by the devilish anti-spam community. Um, hello? Read the log of emails sent back and forth. Shifman is abusive, insulting and, quite frankly, stupid. He seems ignorant of any legal knowledge whatsoever; threatening to sue all involved in critisising him for simply reporting a piece of spam _he_ wrote.
"..if most people were intelligent and responsible, but personally I don't feel like accessing it at some point in the woods during a camping trip and seeing that someone took a shit where I'm pitching my tent."
:)
But surely that would be good, as then you would know not to pitch your tent there?
How do you know it was the US? Could be that the Soviets put that there to blame the US and give themselves a propagando coup.
:)
Just my attempt to look upon events like this from all angles
Why would a singularity be unreasonable? Just because it sounds like it's wrong doesn't make it so. Just look at Quantum Physics (I'm sure many have made this point before me :).
Sometimes things just "are". Why should there necessarily be any law of the universe that rules out infinities?
Uh, hello? You're not being /forced/ to use Slashdot, are you?! You're getting this for /free/ for God's sake - how in the hell can you possibly fault CmdrTaco?!
> Don't mention your /. karma. They won't care.
/. Karma of 47?!
Scene:
Lacky: I thought you'd like to see this sir?
Bush: A printout of an email?
Lacky: Yes sir, but look!
Bush: My GOD! A
Lacky: We've checked. It's genuine sir.
Bush: I'll present this to congress immediately! If all goes well, we can have these proposals in written law by next week!
Lacky: Yes sir, Mr President!
Ok, I know Bush wouldn't be that smart, and having congress approve anything in one week is asking for a miracle. But *apart* from that, the concept's sound!
It could happen!
It would have interesting applications for movies and theatres. Actors could "fly" about, and producers wouldn't have to worry about people seeing the wires.
Although the patent is only valid now in the US :)
Hey, if you had some kickass, nuclear probes, what would you do? Sure, it would be neat to have a look about the solar system, but it would be even more fun to blow 'em up!
Scientist 1: Hey, wanna crash a probe into a moon?
Scientist 2: Is is nuclear powered?
Scientist 1: Hell yeah!
Scientist 2: Then what are we waitin' for?
Scientist 3: Wheee! There it goes! Asteriods ain't the only things in this system that can make funky craters!
Probe: Boooom!!
I mean, these guys have monitored all this boring data for decades - I think they're entitled to blow some shit up now and again.
Hey! You're right! How could we have progressed so much in 10 years?! Hell, I'll ignore the fact that it is purely a matter of the /size/ of the rocket and not the technology as to whether the moon could be reached, and that mathematics that show that the current Saturn 5 could reach the moon quite easily, and that technology in the 10 years from 1990-2000 saw the increase of computing power a hundredfold.
Ok, so I know you're a troll but think about it. The Saturn 5 exists, and if you don't believe that go up and touch it for yourself. Secondly, work out how much fuel it carries and whether it could get to the moon using a simple, direct path. And hey, it can! So maybe the moon landing isn't so unbelievable after all?
Since it hasn't happened yet, I would say it was pretty unlikely :)
But if it did happen, then we would likely die. The more dimensions gravity acts within, the more the gravitational force increases. I suppose it would be possible to calculate what would happen if this were the case, but being the squishy, frail forms of life that we are, I wouldn't put much hope in our survival. Most likely we would burn up as Earth approached the Sun.
Warwick University hasn't got any restrictions that I know of. The net's fast and allows telneting, file-sharing, and irc. Everything I've tried in fact. The DNS is a bit buggy, but that's gotten better.
;)
Guess I'm one of the lucky ones
Yep!
Better mob rule than a brutal dictatorship!
:)
Remember, even though it may be mob rule, you're *part* of that mob
Karma points aside, the moderation system is meant to give posts that are useful to others a higher rating. This has been a very imformative article to me as I can be bothered with the registration. Just because it's cut and past doesn't mean it's not of value. Can we forget about Karma for one minute and instead try and moderate posts based on how useful they are?
Gak! A Linux Zealot! Just claiming that Linux is the best in all respects is stupid to say the least. Only by attitudes seen in posts like the insightful one above (hey, the moderators have spoken!) can Linux possibly hope to advance. Sure, Microsoft does a lot of stuff wrong, but it also does some stuff right, and ignoring this just because you believes Linux is so good that Windows will never come close to beating it, only paves the way for the demise of our intrepid free OS.
I've used Linux for acouple of years now, every since Redhat 5.1 came out, and Windows has taken a back seat to my Linux From Scratch partition. The only reason I still keep Windows on my machine is to test out my site on IE, and to play all my favourite games. So I'm as much for Linux as anyone. But clinging onto the naive views that you seem to have is pointless. Yes Linux is a great OS, but does that really mean we can ignore the activities of our main competitor, Microsoft?
Look for stupid hair-styles. All boy bands are required by law to have at least one member with stupid-looking hair; you just have to associate hair-style with band name.
True - I've seen far more Linux bashers posting recently than Linux zealots :)
>"MS Struggles to Discredit Linux"
;p
/struggle/ at all; it's not exactly hard to point out the flaws in Windows :)
:p*
> Gee, it's not like the Linux crowd has been trying to do this to Microsoft for the past 10 years or anything.
Ah but the Linux crowd doesn't need to
*Puts on flameproof suit!
In my experience I've found the Athlons faster than the Pentiums. My Athlon 1.2GHz smoked a P4 1.4GHz in benchmarks - heh :)
Hmmm... e-posters? :)
Still, it is far more common than it was 6 years ago, and has come a long way technologically. Quite a bit of embedded Linux is getting around as well, for instance the Tivo, so I wouldn't dismiss his claim altogether...
That said, Linux isn't as popular as Windows or MacOS, and may never be, but it is possible to live in a niche market. Linux is doing very well at the moment, despite its relatively small following, and I see no reason why it can't continue to do so. Linux may well benefit from money spent on it, but unlike its other competitors, it cannot go bankrupt either.
Equal to your IQ then? Someone mod this twat down to something negative.