United States...the largest foreign aid contributor in the world
Untrue
The US is fourth in absolute terms of overseas aid given (behind Japan Germany and France). In terms of percentage national income, the US at 0.12 per cent, ranks below Uganda.
This graph shows that in absolute terms, the US is fourth, behind Japan, France and Germany.
Of course, overseas aid is a complex thing, and absolute numbers don't begin to to tell the whole story (for example, private charitable giving in the US waaaay exceeds the official government amount; for another, the "tied" aid I mentioned in my original post).
But whatever figures you use, I think it's hard to make the case that the US is doing well in its overseas aid.
The US spends more on world relief than any other CONTINANT put together
Simply, not true.
The Centre for Global Development recently put the US second from bottom in its ranking of how effectively developed nation's policies help the poor. The US contribution, measured as a percentage of its GDP, is smaller than Uganda's. The US devotes 0.12% of its national income to overseas aid. Europe provides twice as much cash.
Further, much of the US aid is either tied to "reform" (ie breaking open new markets for US corporations) or military spending (ie overseas "aid" goes straight in to the coffers of US arms manufacturers). Sadly, the current US administration uses aid budgets as just another tool to further its own interests.
Does anyone know whether websites that insist on the vile practice of background music are liable to the same perfomance charges that (eg) radio stations are? It would seem that such music could qualify as a "public performance". It would be nice if the charges were sufficient to dissuade deluded web-designers from thinking background music is a neat idea.
the only really reliable approach I've found is IP blacklists for repeat offenders
I also use IP blacklists (locally compiled and various RBLs) but this is becoming less effective as the spam gangs are moving to using their own army of proxies rather than the traditional exploitation of open relays or throw-away accounts. I'm not saying that ISPs shouldn't be responsible for what emanates from their networks, but these trojaned users are a very different kettle of fish than spammers having "pink contracts" with spam-friendly ISPs.
So, a virus would be legal so long as it had a click this EULA?
Probably. Remember that the Friend Greeting "worm" had an installer where you had to consent to its operation (ie sending itself to all your contacts). But it still gets detected as malware by eg McAfee
I agree that the precautionary principle is an important element in the debate about GM, but when it comes to food, it is not the most important factor. The attempt to introduce GM crops is about control of the food chain; it has nothing to do with "feeding the starving" and even the (alleged) improved efficiency and profitability is a secondary benefit, at least in the short term. It's about control. When those pesky farmers can no longer save seeds year to year but have to buy a licence (annually), then the entire food chain, from field via distribution to table is completely controlled by megacorps. That concerns me even more than the unknown effects of releasing such material into the environment
To put it another way : most people here on slashdot are appalled at the prospect of ubiquitous DRM, yet I see plenty of people missing the point when it comes to GM food.
GM crops are the Palladium of the food industry
And you know, food security is actually more important to us than listening to our MP3s and watching our DVDs.
Correct about Conrad Black ("Lord Black of Crossharbour" as he now is, the only Lord of a tube station). But Murdoch owns lots of newspapers (The Times and The Sun to mention two in the UK) globally. And no doubt he'll be owning a shed-load more in the US after today.
Agreed. But more telling still, the Outlook family already has built-in tools for establishing trust (S/MIME, working in usable state since O2k SP1, 3 years ago) - but how many of even the largest organisations bother to use them? The demand for backward compatibility with an entrenched (flawed!?) protocol is why all technical add-ons to SMTP, from the promising but limited (eg TMDA), to the fundamentally flawed (OP), are never going to provide a complete "solution".
By his own logic
on
I, Spammer
·
· Score: 2, Funny
problem is you have to be REALLY sure this is him. What if an innocent person who shares the same name is targetted.
Well, if he hasn't opted out of our "special offer" to exact retribution upon him, then he must want us to do this.
But what's to stop the spammer simply using a white-listed address that doesn't belong to them? (ie Joe Job)
[cf the current virus using the from address support@microsoft.com. That email address is now inoperative because of the bombardment of bounces and error message.]
why would any mail admin want to have an open relay?
Usually, they don't actually want it, they are just clueless. There's the odd individual who might claim to have justification for operating an open-relay, but in my experience, there is absolutely no reason for it these days
[Disclaimer : I have the highest regard and respect for John Gilmore; I just think he's wrong about this particular issue.]
I thought we had already had this whole cycle... played out in the '80s
Yep. Remember the Netware dongle? How about the funny plastic lens that came with Elite? It was supposed to "descramble" some fuzz on the screen to yield a code, but was a real PITA; we found it much more reliable to simply squint at the screen and guess. I think it probably cost them more to make the lens/dongles than they figured they would lose to unauthorised copying; the lenses certainly disappeared quickly and without trace in later releases of Elite.
I'm not disagreeing that there are times when spreading papers out is the best approach to a task. I just disagree that filing your taxes is one of them. I use software for my taxes precisely because it eliminates the need for paper, pencil and calculator. Of course, software doesn't eliminate the need to be diligent in entering information correctly (even though it will eliminate many of the more egregious possible mistakes).
As an aside, I thought QuickTax does have shortcuts to flick between a field and the form that it's derived from?
Slashdot Mirror
That's one way of reading my post. Another would be to read it as a savage condemnation of the spendthrift Ugandans.
Untrue
The US is fourth in absolute terms of overseas aid given (behind Japan Germany and France). In terms of percentage national income, the US at 0.12 per cent, ranks below Uganda.
This graph shows that in absolute terms, the US is fourth, behind Japan, France and Germany.
Of course, overseas aid is a complex thing, and absolute numbers don't begin to to tell the whole story (for example, private charitable giving in the US waaaay exceeds the official government amount; for another, the "tied" aid I mentioned in my original post).
But whatever figures you use, I think it's hard to make the case that the US is doing well in its overseas aid.
Simply, not true.
The Centre for Global Development recently put the US second from bottom in its ranking of how effectively developed nation's policies help the poor. The US contribution, measured as a percentage of its GDP, is smaller than Uganda's. The US devotes 0.12% of its national income to overseas aid. Europe provides twice as much cash.
Further, much of the US aid is either tied to "reform" (ie breaking open new markets for US corporations) or military spending (ie overseas "aid" goes straight in to the coffers of US arms manufacturers). Sadly, the current US administration uses aid budgets as just another tool to further its own interests.
Yes
Does anyone know whether websites that insist on the vile practice of background music are liable to the same perfomance charges that (eg) radio stations are? It would seem that such music could qualify as a "public performance". It would be nice if the charges were sufficient to dissuade deluded web-designers from thinking background music is a neat idea.
I also use IP blacklists (locally compiled and various RBLs) but this is becoming less effective as the spam gangs are moving to using their own army of proxies rather than the traditional exploitation of open relays or throw-away accounts. I'm not saying that ISPs shouldn't be responsible for what emanates from their networks, but these trojaned users are a very different kettle of fish than spammers having "pink contracts" with spam-friendly ISPs.
Probably. Remember that the Friend Greeting "worm" had an installer where you had to consent to its operation (ie sending itself to all your contacts). But it still gets detected as malware by eg McAfee
Actually more than that - they counted as high as 65535, but then their bug-reporting software went titsup.
I agree that the precautionary principle is an important element in the debate about GM, but when it comes to food, it is not the most important factor. The attempt to introduce GM crops is about control of the food chain; it has nothing to do with "feeding the starving" and even the (alleged) improved efficiency and profitability is a secondary benefit, at least in the short term. It's about control. When those pesky farmers can no longer save seeds year to year but have to buy a licence (annually), then the entire food chain, from field via distribution to table is completely controlled by megacorps. That concerns me even more than the unknown effects of releasing such material into the environment
To put it another way : most people here on slashdot are appalled at the prospect of ubiquitous DRM, yet I see plenty of people missing the point when it comes to GM food.
GM crops are the Palladium of the food industry
And you know, food security is actually more important to us than listening to our MP3s and watching our DVDs.
I don't think it's just those "consumed by the environmental movement" that exhibit such stupidity; such ignorance seems to be widespread
Interesting. Have you considered creating this as a module that could be used from iptables?
Correct about Conrad Black ("Lord Black of Crossharbour" as he now is, the only Lord of a tube station). But Murdoch owns lots of newspapers (The Times and The Sun to mention two in the UK) globally. And no doubt he'll be owning a shed-load more in the US after today.
Leaving aside the fact that the US was acting in its own interests, as much as those of its allies, in all the events you mention :
Isn't establishing a global positioning system doing just that? Aren't competition and diversity in the marketplace good things?
I would have thought Mexico City has a stronger claim to this title.
Agreed. But more telling still, the Outlook family already has built-in tools for establishing trust (S/MIME, working in usable state since O2k SP1, 3 years ago) - but how many of even the largest organisations bother to use them? The demand for backward compatibility with an entrenched (flawed!?) protocol is why all technical add-ons to SMTP, from the promising but limited (eg TMDA), to the fundamentally flawed (OP), are never going to provide a complete "solution".
Well, if he hasn't opted out of our "special offer" to exact retribution upon him, then he must want us to do this.
[cf the current virus using the from address support@microsoft.com. That email address is now inoperative because of the bombardment of bounces and error message.]
Interesting how they test for the plant - spray the crop and if it dies you're innocent.
Hotmail is not anonymous - originating IP address is carried in the mail headers.
Usually, they don't actually want it, they are just clueless. There's the odd individual who might claim to have justification for operating an open-relay, but in my experience, there is absolutely no reason for it these days
[Disclaimer : I have the highest regard and respect for John Gilmore; I just think he's wrong about this particular issue.]
Maybe if the threat hasn't worked then they should actually be blacklisted?
Yep. Remember the Netware dongle? How about the funny plastic lens that came with Elite? It was supposed to "descramble" some fuzz on the screen to yield a code, but was a real PITA; we found it much more reliable to simply squint at the screen and guess. I think it probably cost them more to make the lens/dongles than they figured they would lose to unauthorised copying; the lenses certainly disappeared quickly and without trace in later releases of Elite.
I'm not disagreeing that there are times when spreading papers out is the best approach to a task. I just disagree that filing your taxes is one of them. I use software for my taxes precisely because it eliminates the need for paper, pencil and calculator. Of course, software doesn't eliminate the need to be diligent in entering information correctly (even though it will eliminate many of the more egregious possible mistakes).
As an aside, I thought QuickTax does have shortcuts to flick between a field and the form that it's derived from?