Thunderbird supports enigmail. You can download the latest version on enigmail I was using a night build and there weren't any problems nor aren't with this release.
Veering off topic, I know, but I have not been able to get the Enigmail plugin to work correctly with Mozilla 1.4.1 on Mac OS X. I've googled around for this and seen others having similar problems, but the solution hasn't popped up yet. The command-line gpg client works fine, but Enigmail always fails to initialize. Works like a charm under Linux, of course.
Can anyone comment on how well Enigmail works with Thunderbird, under Mac OS X?
Is being wrongfully accused a crime? Doesn't seem to be. If someone is wrongfully accused they're lucky to get a letter with an "Oops, we fucked up." in it.
You are absolutely correct that innocent people are often accused of having committed crimes which they did not in fact commit. It is also true that, in some cases, those people are wrongly convicted of those crimes.
But I don't see how those realities are relevant to my previous post. The ancestor post asked whether "sharing your MP3 files sounds like a crime" (my paraphrase). Perhaps I misunderstood that post's intent, but it sounded to me as though that poster was suggesting that as long as you personally disagree with a law, it's OK to break it and not expect to be punished.
I sincerely hope that this kid who is accused of having written the Blaster worm will receive a fair trial. And if has been wrongfully accused of that crime, I hope that justice is done and he is found innocent. But on the flip side, if he did commit the crime, regardless of whether it "sounded like a crime" to him, he should be found guilty.
And what happens when you commit a "crime" even though you didn't know it was a crime?
Why do you put the word "crime" in quotes? Is sharing MP3 files (as cited in the earlier post) a crime, or not?
Sure, ignorance of the law is no excuse, supposedly.
That is also my understanding.
But how do you try to get a law changed you don't even know about? I guess it must be our obligation as citizens to know every law.
OK, I do see your point. But what's the alternative? Make ignorance of the law an acceptable defense for all crimes? Or if not for all crimes, what's the criteria?
Better pick up those law books quick Lyle...
Thanks for setting me straight. So, if I can sum up the legal advice so far:
It is OK to commit crimes as long as they don't "sound like crimes"; and,
You too can go to jail for something as innocent as sharing your MP3 files. Does that sound like a CRIME to SOCIETY you should be PUNISHED for?
A crime is "an act committed or omitted in violation of a law forbidding or commanding it and for which punishment is imposed upon conviction". The question of whether sharing MP3 files "sounds like a crime" is moot. It is a crime. If you disagree with the law(s), then you are free to use any number of legal means to try to get those laws changed.
The article states that this "18 year old" is the author, but later on it talks about how he was "observed testing" which all sounds a bit dubious.
If he is the author, it doesn't surprise me at all. I have to believe that people pull stunts like this to draw attention to themselves, and there is no way that he could resist bragging about this for very long.
you're being sarky, but he _meant_ to say 'signing'. she was coreographing her 'song'.
OK, I see your point. But to review the original post...
I remember flipping through the channels one day and stoping on MTV. Briney was up there half naked as usaul so I stopped to watch. When she was done "signing" her song the VJ started to interview her. When she started to talk, it was barley audible. The sound technicans had turned the level down so low that you couldn't hear her real signing voice and only the tape. I guess they forgot to turn it up after she was done with the performance.
... one could reasonably assume that he was attempting to spell the word singing instead of signing. Especially when explaining why her voice was barley audible.
However, you can download it, play around, write some code, and file out the code to share with others.
Thanks very much, Aaron. But to follow up on my response to SeaGK, does their license explicitly give permission for me to "share with others" the non-commercial software that I develop using VAST?
I'm not trying to pick nits here. I would guess that once you've exported the code from VAST into some "shareable" source code format, that there are no obvious signs that the code was generated with VAST (as opposed to some other development environment, like Squeak). So I don't doubt that one could "get away with" using VAST to develop non-commercial Smalltalk programs for widespread distribution;) I just wonder if that use is allowed by IBM's license.
Thanks very much for the clarification, SeaGK. I couldn't even find a copy of the license online so this helps a lot.
As you already noted, however, I think it's important to distinguish between "free for non-commercial use" and an unlimited evaluation copy. I don't know a lot about Smalltalk in the first place, especially the mechanics of how one distributes Smalltalk programs to other users. Having said that, it doesn't sound like their license explicitly permits me to develop free (non-commercial) software applications with my evaluation copy of VAST and distribute those applications.
IBM has released Visual Age 6.01 for Smalltalk for free for non-commercial use...
I don't doubt your word, but I am having trouble finding any evidence to support the claim that this is "free for non-commercial use". I started at the home page for Visual Age for Smalltalk, and clicked through a few of the links from that page, but didn't find anything to suggest that it's free. I also subscribed to the comp.lang.smalltalk and ibm.software.vasmalltalk newsgroups and scanned the posts there for the last few months but didn't see any announcements along these lines.
So before I go through the hassle of signing up for an "account" with IBM, and then downloading and installing the software, could someone please provide a pointer to the information about how it's licensed for non-commercial use?
... the neat thing about AppleCare, as opposed to most other "extended warranty" schemes that are really scams, is that Apple is very generous in their definition of what's covered... So in short, hell yes, get the AppleCare.
Thanks, Daniel. Yes, I'm seeing similar testimonials elsewhere in this thread and it's painting a much more encouraging picture of AppleCare for me. This is good news, as my shiny new 15" PowerBook is supposed to arrive via FedEx sometime tomorrow morning;) Based on your and others' advice, I think I will go ahead and pick up AppleCare sometime soon.
Replying to my own reply, just wanted to add that I didn't mean to sound quite so negative about AppleCare;)
No, it's not what most people would think of as "insurance", but that doesn't mean it's worthless. A lot of the other posts in this thread indicate that Apple is pretty lenient in what you call a manufacturing defect (and thus covered by their warranty) versus what they could argue was damage due to, you know, flying monkeys. So it may be well worth the money.
No, it's definitely not what most people think of as "insurance". It is an extended warranty, basically covering "... defects in materials and workmanship", to quote the AppleCare terms and conditions. It does not cover damage due to accident, abuse, flying monkeys, etc. So if you drop your PowerBook and crack the screen, or damage it through some other accident, AppleCare isn't going to cover it (or, at least, they're not obligated to according to the AppleCare terms and conditions).
Whatever you are thinking about doing in LaTeX has probably already been done, so try to get a template if you can and just begin playing around with it - this is the best advice I can give you.
I second Gregory's advice about looking for templates to start from. I would add that if you figure out how to do something especially tricky (for me, it almost always had to do with formatting tables), make sure to take notes and/or stash away a copy of that document for later reference.
I use OOO at home, but the lack of an Outlook-compatible PIM is the killer for businesses. I suppose that means we need an open-source clone of Exchange too.
The OpenGroupware.org project may be of interest to you. It was only announced a few days ago and so I'm not up to speed on it, but it sounds like their goals are in line with what you described.
I know that most of the Slashdot audience probably agrees politically with Michael, but it's pretty clear to me that this whole goddamn story is just an excuse for people to make snide jokes about Ronald Reagan. I don't care whether you like Reagan or not (I didn't particularly), but when did Slashdot get into the business of just posting Republican-baiting stories?
Don't have any points to mod this up, so all I can do is say "Ditto". And, as an aside, I wouldn't be so sure that most of the Slashdot audience agrees politically with Michael.
Tim O'Reilly's comments about open source licenses and their irrelevance for internet applications reminded of this article by Joe Johnston from a few years ago. It was written around the beginning of the media blitz on Microsoft's.NET platform, and goes into some more detail about possible ramifications for open source software developers of the shift to web services and internet applications.
Re:JR Rowling and initials and fashion...
on
A Game of Thrones
·
· Score: 1
You have to wonder about the publishers given the success of other women fantasy authors such as Ursula K. LeGuin.
Right, also Anne McCaffrey (author of the Dragonriders of Pern series) and probably others I'm forgetting. I read all of Ms. LeGuin's and Ms. McCaffrey's books when I was a teenager, and it never crossed my mind that they were female authors.
Re:JR Rowling and initials and fashion...
on
A Game of Thrones
·
· Score: 1
I heard that "J.R." Rowling was asked by her publishers to drop her given name and go with the initials because they were worried school boys wouldn't read a novel written by a woman -- she was asked to do it by the money people rather than wanting to do it herself....
I heard the same thing, but in the version I heard they asked her to use the initials "J. K." instead of "J. R."
I am downloading mozilla-win32-1.4-installer.exe from the BitTorrent link posted here but for paranoia's sake I would like to check it against the official Mozilla release. Does the Mozilla project post MD5 checksums for its releases anywhere? I didn't see them in the download directory.
Slashdot Mirror
Can anyone comment on how well Enigmail works with Thunderbird, under Mac OS X?
But I don't see how those realities are relevant to my previous post. The ancestor post asked whether "sharing your MP3 files sounds like a crime" (my paraphrase). Perhaps I misunderstood that post's intent, but it sounded to me as though that poster was suggesting that as long as you personally disagree with a law, it's OK to break it and not expect to be punished.
I sincerely hope that this kid who is accused of having written the Blaster worm will receive a fair trial. And if has been wrongfully accused of that crime, I hope that justice is done and he is found innocent. But on the flip side, if he did commit the crime, regardless of whether it "sounded like a crime" to him, he should be found guilty.
That is also my understanding.
OK, I do see your point. But what's the alternative? Make ignorance of the law an acceptable defense for all crimes? Or if not for all crimes, what's the criteria?
Thanks for setting me straight. So, if I can sum up the legal advice so far:
I'm not trying to pick nits here. I would guess that once you've exported the code from VAST into some "shareable" source code format, that there are no obvious signs that the code was generated with VAST (as opposed to some other development environment, like Squeak). So I don't doubt that one could "get away with" using VAST to develop non-commercial Smalltalk programs for widespread distribution
Thanks very much for the clarification, SeaGK. I couldn't even find a copy of the license online so this helps a lot.
As you already noted, however, I think it's important to distinguish between "free for non-commercial use" and an unlimited evaluation copy. I don't know a lot about Smalltalk in the first place, especially the mechanics of how one distributes Smalltalk programs to other users. Having said that, it doesn't sound like their license explicitly permits me to develop free (non-commercial) software applications with my evaluation copy of VAST and distribute those applications.
So before I go through the hassle of signing up for an "account" with IBM, and then downloading and installing the software, could someone please provide a pointer to the information about how it's licensed for non-commercial use?
Replying to my own reply, just wanted to add that I didn't mean to sound quite so negative about AppleCare ;)
No, it's not what most people would think of as "insurance", but that doesn't mean it's worthless. A lot of the other posts in this thread indicate that Apple is pretty lenient in what you call a manufacturing defect (and thus covered by their warranty) versus what they could argue was damage due to, you know, flying monkeys. So it may be well worth the money.
It's not too late to invest in some Old Glory Robot Insurance, for when the metal ones come. And they will.
Tim O'Reilly's comments about open source licenses and their irrelevance for internet applications reminded of this article by Joe Johnston from a few years ago. It was written around the beginning of the media blitz on Microsoft's .NET platform, and goes into some more detail about possible ramifications for open source software developers of the shift to web services and internet applications.
I am downloading mozilla-win32-1.4-installer.exe from the BitTorrent link posted here but for paranoia's sake I would like to check it against the official Mozilla release. Does the Mozilla project post MD5 checksums for its releases anywhere? I didn't see them in the download directory.
The quote from Anne Frank in your sig was a touching epilogue to the post.