Just for the heck of it, I'll defend my semantics. Yup... DUSEL was proposed in the early 2000s right after Homestake shutdown. And the key being, using that site "as an underground science laboratory". Prior to that, it was indeed used... "as a goldmine" (with some science on the side). So it indeed seemed like a 'new' proposal.
As the NSF was asking for RFPs at the time, there were three or four contenders (a new mine in Colorado, and an existing mine in MN, and of course Homestake). At the time, Homestake had a lot of positive elements, but also some serious problems (ownership, EPA liability, and many thousands of vertical feet of water). So, at the time it was only a "possibility", and far from a sure thing that DUSEL would ever come to fruition. I would speculate that even today, given the nature of science funding and grants... it's still a bit touch and go.
Neither article mention's what the proper response of the receiver of these goods should have been.
If someone told you Walmart was giving away all it's products, would you just go in and load up your cart?
I think the users of Craigslist are naive, much like new email users who believe every spam they receive. There were comments on the DallasNews site from readers to the effect of 'this should be against the law'. But it's not. There is no law against lying (outside of commercial product misrepresentation, lying under oath, etc).
Hopefully, Craigslist users will wise up soon. Get 'Bills-of-Sale', or at least determine the proper owner and get permission for 'free' items.
Actually, with Gmail... perhaps there is an unpublished solution?
I just got an email with this redacted SPF header. It was sent from example.net to my domain, example.com, and forwarded to my Gmail account (not gafyd):
Received-SPF: fail (google.com: domain of friend@example.net does not designate 111.111.111.111 as permitted sender) client-ip=111.111.111.111;Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=hardfail (google.com: domain of friend@example.net does not designate 111.111.111.111 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=friend@example.net
Incidentally, prior to that, my server had passed the SPF record from the original host.
Received-SPF: pass (smtp.example.com: SPF record at example.net designates 123.123.123.123 as permitted sender)
So why did I get the email, the header clearly says "fail" and "hardfail"? My only guess...
In my Gmail account, I have my an account at my (forwarding) domain setup as an authorized sender. I'm allowed to send as joe@example.com, having previously proved
ownership by receiving an email from Google at that account.
To me, this makes sense. I would think that Google could make the leap of faith that if you receive email at a domain, they might as well relay all email from that domain to your Gmail account, and ignore mis-matched SPF.
And if this is not actually the case... well, it should be. So, my simple answer to the poster's question: add your domain (email addy) to your account. Add another email address.
While the Interstate is great, I've spent literally DAYS on I90, it definately erodes State's Rights.
The desire to capture Federal dollars for road projects, especially in large (area), rural States, forces them to fall in line with Federal mandates and guidelines.
Don't get me wrong, I suspect that most Federal mandates are for 'the good of the people', seat belts, speed limits, etc; and actually do cut down on deaths and accidents.
I'm young enough to only have vague memories of Michigan getting-in-line with a minumum drinking age of 21 (from 18, I think it was the last of the 50), and more recently Montana doing away with the 'reasonable and prudent' speed limit.
In general the pot-of-gold that is the Federal Transporation budget, has made our country nice homogenous, in it's road system and everything that it touches. For better or worse.
In my case, I presume all my data is 'somewhere' (my servers, 3rd party websites, etc). I don't go to lengths to archive/encrypt it. But my survivors will need access to it. So this gets back to the simple question of secure username/password storage.
I use Passowrd Gorilla. One master pass, to encrypt the rest, and most of the entries have 'notes' like the URL of the applicable site or server. Of course I leave the master password with my S.O. and/or anyone who I trust not to use it till neccessary.
Lots of other projects out there for the same purpose, but I like P.G. since it does TK & Windows, isn't Net dependent, and other features like autosave.
I look at this 'put every thing on Google' trend as sort of a unique thin client approach.
At my work we're slowly abandoning Sun Rays, sad to see them go.
But Google could just be a 'SunRay for Home Users' It stores your applications (email, picture editing, productivity?), and your files. All the common user needs to do is have some common hardware and an Internet connection (and bare minimums should suffice). (Also note the above comment about Google Linux.)
Best of all, it's portable, you can take your 'session' with you to any desktop; and loose nothing if your desktop dies.
Privacy concerns aside, I'd use it. I'm an above average computer user, but I don't like worrying about redundant disks, and email backup, etc; and my usage (email/real important files, e.g. taxes) is minimal, probably less then 2GB.
Having worked with Windows TeleRadiology equipment a bit at my hospital, I was excited when I found a Mac solution at Osirix's Website... last FEBRUARY!
lukej's Recent Submissions
Title Datestamp
Your chance to rearrange the USA. Sat 08 Oct 02:55PM Rejected How your doctor uses his iPod Tue 15 Feb 12:28PM Rejected
Kerberos/Ldap/Samba vs. MS Active Directory Fri 11 Feb 12:25AM Rejected
Another friend of mine saw the link on CNN.com, and I knew then it would make it to./
"News for Nerds, after CNN's blesssing".
I think I am pretty agnostic about the whole Postgres/Mysql love affair. But I do find amusement in the 'personalities' of those supporting both sides.
Point #3;I always like the standards = portable argument. Reality check:
a> if somebody writes a huge DB app, standards compliant or not, their going to stick with their base DB b> if it is a small DB app, then it's trivial to rewrite if you do want to migrate DBs
With all my Postgres and Mysql based stuff, I've never rewritten one for the other. Often times I've upgrade the DB or it's host machine. But, with both Postgres Mysql, performance for my (granted, small) DBs is fine with both, the DBs are free, and installing is simple.
I just don't think DB migration takes place often, even if you can find two compliant DBs!
I think the poster is looking for sorting techniques. But for me my big problem was replication to all my desktops. So while the sorting is no better then folders/subfolders, I like:
http://sitebar.org/
That little suffix of 'beta' can do a lot. It magically relases software providers of the yet unfound problems. Bugs are no longer flaws, rather simply 'unresolved issues'.
Slashdot Mirror
Just for the heck of it, I'll defend my semantics. Yup... DUSEL was proposed in the early 2000s right after Homestake shutdown. And the key being, using that site "as an underground science laboratory". Prior to that, it was indeed used... "as a goldmine" (with some science on the side). So it indeed seemed like a 'new' proposal.
As the NSF was asking for RFPs at the time, there were three or four contenders (a new mine in Colorado, and an existing mine in MN, and of course Homestake). At the time, Homestake had a lot of positive elements, but also some serious problems (ownership, EPA liability, and many thousands of vertical feet of water). So, at the time it was only a "possibility", and far from a sure thing that DUSEL would ever come to fruition. I would speculate that even today, given the nature of science funding and grants... it's still a bit touch and go.
Second.
For up to about 6-8U, vertical is great.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=rack+vertical+mount
'Fits' better in existing small rooms (i.e. closets), and still gives you plenty of access.
A slightly more dramaticized version of the same: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unuyDJG7XCA
Neither article mention's what the proper response of the receiver of these goods should have been. If someone told you Walmart was giving away all it's products, would you just go in and load up your cart?
I think the users of Craigslist are naive, much like new email users who believe every spam they receive. There were comments on the DallasNews site from readers to the effect of 'this should be against the law'. But it's not. There is no law against lying (outside of commercial product misrepresentation, lying under oath, etc).
Hopefully, Craigslist users will wise up soon. Get 'Bills-of-Sale', or at least determine the proper owner and get permission for 'free' items.
Not quite what you are talking about... but the venerable Death & Taxes: http://www.wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
I smelled shenanigans
Thank goodness this close to St.Patty's Day somebody is finally smelling them shenanigans!
If you mean by preparing, drinking some morning tea, and playing with my iPhone.
... cache ...
http://www.datacenterknowledge.com.nyud.net/archives/2008/10/22/a-look-at-googles-newest-data-center/
Not as fancy of a website, but we got our's from this small time shop: http://www.boonerings.com/ . Excellent customer service!
Ditto. Wife and I got our's here: http://www.boonerings.com/
Actually, with Gmail... perhaps there is an unpublished solution?
I just got an email with this redacted SPF header. It was sent from example.net to my domain, example.com, and forwarded to my Gmail account (not gafyd):
Received-SPF: fail (google.com: domain of friend@example.net does not designate 111.111.111.111 as permitted sender) client-ip=111.111.111.111;Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=hardfail (google.com: domain of friend@example.net does not designate 111.111.111.111 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=friend@example.net
Incidentally, prior to that, my server had passed the SPF record from the original host.
Received-SPF: pass (smtp.example.com: SPF record at example.net designates 123.123.123.123 as permitted sender)
So why did I get the email, the header clearly says "fail" and "hardfail"? My only guess...
In my Gmail account, I have my an account at my (forwarding) domain setup as an authorized sender. I'm allowed to send as joe@example.com, having previously proved ownership by receiving an email from Google at that account.
To me, this makes sense. I would think that Google could make the leap of faith that if you receive email at a domain, they might as well relay all email from that domain to your Gmail account, and ignore mis-matched SPF.
And if this is not actually the case... well, it should be. So, my simple answer to the poster's question: add your domain (email addy) to your account.
Add another email address.
While the Interstate is great, I've spent literally DAYS on I90, it definately erodes State's Rights.
The desire to capture Federal dollars for road projects, especially in large (area), rural States, forces them to fall in line with Federal mandates and guidelines.
Don't get me wrong, I suspect that most Federal mandates are for 'the good of the people', seat belts, speed limits, etc; and actually do cut down on deaths and accidents.
I'm young enough to only have vague memories of Michigan getting-in-line with a minumum drinking age of 21 (from 18, I think it was the last of the 50), and more recently Montana doing away with the 'reasonable and prudent' speed limit.
In general the pot-of-gold that is the Federal Transporation budget, has made our country nice homogenous, in it's road system and everything that it touches. For better or worse.
Having been to the 8,000ft level of Homestake, I'll confess, it is spooky! Radios would be nice.
/.'ers should help lobby to turn the now defunct Homestake into one heck of a laboratory...
h _Dakota)
However, deeeeeep mines (gold in Homestake's case) are probably vastly out numbered by 'shallow' coal mines in the Eastern US.
As a side note,
http://neutrino.lbl.gov/Homestake/LOI/
http://www.state.sd.us/homestake/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestake_Mine_(Sout
In my case, I presume all my data is 'somewhere' (my servers, 3rd party websites, etc). I don't go to lengths to archive/encrypt it. But my survivors will need access to it. So this gets back to the simple question of secure username/password storage.
I use Passowrd Gorilla. One master pass, to encrypt the rest, and most of the entries have 'notes' like the URL of the applicable site or server. Of course I leave the master password with my S.O. and/or anyone who I trust not to use it till neccessary.
Lots of other projects out there for the same purpose, but I like P.G. since it does TK & Windows, isn't Net dependent, and other features like autosave.
At my work we're slowly abandoning Sun Rays, sad to see them go.
But Google could just be a 'SunRay for Home Users' It stores your applications (email, picture editing, productivity?), and your files. All the common user needs to do is have some common hardware and an Internet connection (and bare minimums should suffice). (Also note the above comment about Google Linux.)
Best of all, it's portable, you can take your 'session' with you to any desktop; and loose nothing if your desktop dies. Privacy concerns aside, I'd use it. I'm an above average computer user, but I don't like worrying about redundant disks, and email backup, etc; and my usage (email/real important files, e.g. taxes) is minimal, probably less then 2GB.
Ever thought about contributing your 'finds' to the GCC project, or even fixing them yourself?
Another friend of mine saw the link on CNN.com, and I knew then it would make it to
"News for Nerds, after CNN's blesssing".
I think I am pretty agnostic about the whole Postgres/Mysql love affair. But I do find amusement in the 'personalities' of those supporting both sides.
Point #3;I always like the standards = portable argument. Reality check:
a> if somebody writes a huge DB app, standards compliant or not, their going to stick with their base DB
b> if it is a small DB app, then it's trivial to rewrite if you do want to migrate DBs
With all my Postgres and Mysql based stuff, I've never rewritten one for the other. Often times I've upgrade the DB or it's host machine. But, with both Postgres Mysql, performance for my (granted, small) DBs is fine with both, the DBs are free, and installing is simple.
I just don't think DB migration takes place often, even if you can find two compliant DBs!
Sounds alot like a Fermi Problem
From my Gaim Client...
(19:14:51) gmail.com: The broken link has been fixed. Thanks for being our first users!
http://memsense.com/
I think the poster is looking for sorting techniques. But for me my big problem was replication to all my desktops. So while the sorting is no better then folders/subfolders, I like: http://sitebar.org/
That little suffix of 'beta' can do a lot. It magically relases software providers of the yet unfound problems. Bugs are no longer flaws, rather simply 'unresolved issues'.
Didn't get close to the 9m / 1min requirements, but they did manage to get off the ground, over a decade ago! http://www.calpoly.edu/~wpatters/helo.html
Not sure I'll be putting Jasper's eye catching adverts around my neighborhood just yet.... :)