As a Dutch reader, I can guarantee you that nobody in his right mind here minds the way DigiNotar's fiasco is handled. They deserve this, and worse. If you're basically selling trust, you'd better be trustworthy. On the Mozilla Security Blog, the the reason why they handled this as they dit is explained very well: http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/09/02/diginotar-removal-follow-up/
I still agree with you that it should be legalized. The war on drugs is a lost cause, and causes more problems than in solves. But making false claims doesn't help in this discussion. Personally, I think marijuana should be treated like tobacco: just sell it legally, put a warning on it about the health hazards, and tax it to pay for the resulting medical costs.
Brain tumors are the: the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in children under age 20 the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in males up to age 39 the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in females under age 20. the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in females ages 20–39.
I'm not arguing that I'm convinced this is caused by cellphones. Clearly people don't drop dead immediately after using a cellphone, and don't develop a brain tumor after using a cell phone once or twice - we'd have noticed that. But brain tumors are a serious health problem, and all the WHO now claims is: we don't know whether cell phones are one of the causes of brain tumors or not.
I doubt we'll see the XServe (or similar) back. But the announcement did mention that, basically, MacOS X Lion is the server version of MacOS X. It doesn't explicitly say so, but this must mean that there is no longer a separate server version of MacOS. Which is good news, because the server tools were already pretty decent (but too expensive) when I last used them, two versions ago.
No, to make a fair comparison we'd have to go back to Apple II days. But then again Apple fanboys always keep forgetting the details.
Comparing Windows 1.0 to the Apple II would hardly be fair to Windows. The Apple II had a pretty mature OS at that time. Furhtermore, straight from Wikipedia:
Windows 1.0 is a 16-bit graphical operating environment that was released on 20 November 1985
On January 24, 1984, Apple Computer Inc. (now Apple Inc.) introduced the Macintosh personal computer, with the Macintosh 128K model, which came bundled with what was later renamed the Mac OS, but then known simply as the System Software.
When your fairness criterium is the release date, you'd have to compare Window 1.0 with MacOS 2. Which is a sure way of becoming an Apple fanboy.
I don't have version 1.0, but I do have version 1.1.
Admittedly weird to reply on my own post, but I just checked: I have a System 1.0 / Finder 1.1g version of MacOS running under vMac. It appears to run just fine under the latest version of MacOS X.
You're right about the ROM, and yes, the copyright is a legal issue. But AFAIK it's legal to make a ROM dump of an old Mac you own and use that yourself. Also, although technically not legal, I doubt anyone at Apple would care if you would use a ROM file obtained otherwise, given how long MacOS X is deprecated now. The vMac website I mentioned in my earlier post also has a download link for a tool to create a ROM dump.
To run an old version of MacOS, you can use vMac: http://www.vmac.org/ You'll also need a Mac ROM file and a disk image with the MacOS version you'd like to run, but you should be able to find those as well. I don't have version 1.0, but I do have version 1.1.
Because it it did, the Sun would be the most evil entity in the Solar System.
Given that the poster doesn't seem to know or care about the difference between fusion and fission, I don't see how this possibly can be moderated insightful. Funny, possibly - but never insightful.
The real issue I have with the GP is the idea that spammers are reformed by jail time, but sex offenders aren't.
I was a bit too terse to be clear I guess, but what I meant to say is that suggesting that something like Megan's Law should be applied in this case doesn't make senseto me - not that sex offenders can't possibly be reformed by jail time.
Assuming you're right that he's a sociopath, that in itself does not justify punishment - only the typically resulting behaviour does (except in the financial industry, where it earns you a nice bonus, of course).
Ya know, I really, really want to agree with you. Everything you say makes absolute sense.
And yet, spamming is such a massively and prolifically antisocial thing to do that it's hard to imagine anybody ever recovering from it. He couldn't possibly have been unaware of the fact that, had he accidentally taken a shiv to the ribs while in jail, there would have been widespread cheering. Perhaps guilt-ridden cheering, but cheering nonetheless.
I'll have to plead guilty here.
Clearly, he didn't care then, and I really don't see how four years in prison would make him care now.
At the very least, it seems as if there should be some sort of expedited process for prosecution should he return to spamming. Not to deny him due process, but just to place him on a high priority list for investigating. Call it "spammer profiling".
Keeping a good eye on him makes sense, and I would be surprised to find out this isn't happening already. And of course he knew exactly what he was doing. But spending a few years in prison will certainly have left an impact on him, for better or for worse.
Not that I have much sympathy for the man, but he did serve his sentence, sending spam isn't a sex offense, and denying someone internet access is a pretty harsh punishment these days. How about giving him a second chance?
The Google Translation says that LOFAR has made unique observations, which in context I understand to mean as measurements, not the same as saying that it has grabbed the first images. Also, there are no jpgs of pulsars in TFA, so show us the money!
Any Netherlanders who could kindly clarify this?
Sure, but it's a bit of a trick question. I think you're right in that there have no images been gathered yet. I think Google Translation is right in translating 'waarnemingen' by 'observations'. Since English isn't my first language, I did a lookup to verify that 'observation' doen't necessarily mean something that results in an image, and indeed the second meaning the Merriam Webster gives is 'an act of recognizing and noting a fact or occurrence often involving measurement with instrument'.
Offtopic: Congratulations with your son, and I hope the climate, in a decad, will indeed allow skating on the canals...
It's up to the parent to decide whether or not these bribes actually add to the overall success of their child in the long run. It will take some convincing for me to think this is likely.
OK, let me try that. I'm a parent of three kids, two of them in this age group. They're at a Dutch school, and receive grades four times a year, and I pay them an amount of money depending on their grades. Grades here in the Netherlands range from 10 (A, perfect) to 1 (F, couldn't be worse) with 6 being acceptable (C?). The oldest one receive €20,- for each 10, €10,- for each 9, while I get a 'discount' for everything below 6. My reasoning behind this is simple: while they're at school, I want them to consider this their 'work', that is, I want them to take it seriously. One way of showing them that this is serious to me is the same way is my boss does that to me: by paying for it. Of course it's not the only thing that we, trying to be responsible parents trying to give them a good start in life etcetera are doing; but it is one of them. It seems to work fine. The oldest is top of hist class (without being too snotty) and the youngest is about average, which, frankly, is above previous expectations, since he's simply less talented than his older brother (and therefore is payed slightly different too) . I know from personal experience that it motivates them to some extent, and there's another practical reason for doing this: they have a fair chance of making some pocket money without having to take a 'do you want fries with this' type of job that would certainly cost them a lot of time I'd rather have them spend on school work. I realize this does in no way prove these payments will add to 'their overall success in the long run', but I'm convinced that, at least in our case, it does play a positive role in their chances of successfully finishing their school, probably with somewhat higher grades than they'd otherwise have had. Clearly it's not all you can do as a parent, but it is an option, and it can work out well. I'm not surprised research seems to support this at all. Also, in general: is there any reason why a stick should be preferred over a carrot?
I don't doubt the submitter's ability to adapt. The fact that he (lunchlady? her?) is considered for promotion already proves he is doing fine at his current position. But nobody is good at everything. I got the impression that being 'forced into a non-technical role' is the major issue here. The fact that the submitter isn't looking forward to this, may very well (and I admit this is a guess) be caused by the prospect of being moved into a position he won't be functioning too well, because he happens to have a skill set that just isn't a very good match for it.
Sounds like a nice example of the Peter Principle in action. Can't you persuade management that (which i assume is part of your problem, apart from the working hours thing) you simply won't be the right person for this job, and that you'd rather keep doing something that you are good at?
Slashdot Mirror
As a Dutch reader, I can guarantee you that nobody in his right mind here minds the way DigiNotar's fiasco is handled. They deserve this, and worse. If you're basically selling trust, you'd better be trustworthy.
On the Mozilla Security Blog, the the reason why they handled this as they dit is explained very well:
http://blog.mozilla.com/security/2011/09/02/diginotar-removal-follow-up/
Why so negative?
Wouldn't it be nice to finally have a second planet we're sure supports life?
That's games like Carmageddon, right?
Most Mac users don't use video drivers.
Or at least none that they are aware of.
Marijuana usage isn't 100% safe. It can cause or speed up the development of schizophrenia:
http://www.livescience.com/10700-marijuana-worsens-schizophrenia.html.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2005559,00.html
I still agree with you that it should be legalized. The war on drugs is a lost cause, and causes more problems than in solves. But making false claims doesn't help in this discussion.
Personally, I think marijuana should be treated like tobacco: just sell it legally, put a warning on it about the health hazards, and tax it to pay for the resulting medical costs.
Well, actually they are.
You can find the statistics here: http://www.abta.org/sitefiles/pdflibrary/ABTA-FactsandStatistics2010v3.pdf
And to quote:
Brain tumors are the:
the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in children under age 20
the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in males up to age 39
the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in females under age 20.
the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in females ages 20–39.
I'm not arguing that I'm convinced this is caused by cellphones. Clearly people don't drop dead immediately after using a cellphone, and don't develop a brain tumor after using a cell phone once or twice - we'd have noticed that. But brain tumors are a serious health problem, and all the WHO now claims is: we don't know whether cell phones are one of the causes of brain tumors or not.
I doubt we'll see the XServe (or similar) back. But the announcement did mention that, basically, MacOS X Lion is the server version of MacOS X. It doesn't explicitly say so, but this must mean that there is no longer a separate server version of MacOS. Which is good news, because the server tools were already pretty decent (but too expensive) when I last used them, two versions ago.
No, to make a fair comparison we'd have to go back to Apple II days. But then again Apple fanboys always keep forgetting the details.
Comparing Windows 1.0 to the Apple II would hardly be fair to Windows. The Apple II had a pretty mature OS at that time.
Furhtermore, straight from Wikipedia:
Windows 1.0 is a 16-bit graphical operating environment that was released on 20 November 1985
On January 24, 1984, Apple Computer Inc. (now Apple Inc.) introduced the Macintosh personal computer, with the Macintosh 128K model, which came bundled with what was later renamed the Mac OS, but then known simply as the System Software.
When your fairness criterium is the release date, you'd have to compare Window 1.0 with MacOS 2. Which is a sure way of becoming an Apple fanboy.
I don't have version 1.0, but I do have version 1.1.
Admittedly weird to reply on my own post, but I just checked: I have a System 1.0 / Finder 1.1g version of MacOS running under vMac.
It appears to run just fine under the latest version of MacOS X.
You're right about the ROM, and yes, the copyright is a legal issue. But AFAIK it's legal to make a ROM dump of an old Mac you own and use that yourself. Also, although technically not legal, I doubt anyone at Apple would care if you would use a ROM file obtained otherwise, given how long MacOS X is deprecated now.
The vMac website I mentioned in my earlier post also has a download link for a tool to create a ROM dump.
To run an old version of MacOS, you can use vMac:
http://www.vmac.org/
You'll also need a Mac ROM file and a disk image with the MacOS version you'd like to run, but you should be able to find those as well.
I don't have version 1.0, but I do have version 1.1.
On the 20:00 TV news, they just announced that Vodafone does the same.
This is getting a lot of media coverage here.
-1, tasteless
Because it it did, the Sun would be the most evil entity in the Solar System.
Given that the poster doesn't seem to know or care about the difference between fusion and fission, I don't see how this possibly can be moderated insightful. Funny, possibly - but never insightful.
The real issue I have with the GP is the idea that spammers are reformed by jail time, but sex offenders aren't.
I was a bit too terse to be clear I guess, but what I meant to say is that suggesting that something like Megan's Law should be applied in this case doesn't make senseto me - not that sex offenders can't possibly be reformed by jail time.
Assuming you're right that he's a sociopath, that in itself does not justify punishment - only the typically resulting behaviour does (except in the financial industry, where it earns you a nice bonus, of course).
Ya know, I really, really want to agree with you. Everything you say makes absolute sense.
And yet, spamming is such a massively and prolifically antisocial thing to do that it's hard to imagine anybody ever recovering from it. He couldn't possibly have been unaware of the fact that, had he accidentally taken a shiv to the ribs while in jail, there would have been widespread cheering. Perhaps guilt-ridden cheering, but cheering nonetheless.
I'll have to plead guilty here.
Clearly, he didn't care then, and I really don't see how four years in prison would make him care now.
At the very least, it seems as if there should be some sort of expedited process for prosecution should he return to spamming. Not to deny him due process, but just to place him on a high priority list for investigating. Call it "spammer profiling".
Keeping a good eye on him makes sense, and I would be surprised to find out this isn't happening already.
And of course he knew exactly what he was doing. But spending a few years in prison will certainly have left an impact on him, for better or for worse.
Not that I have much sympathy for the man, but he did serve his sentence, sending spam isn't a sex offense, and denying someone internet access is a pretty harsh punishment these days. How about giving him a second chance?
And what are step 2 and 3 good for? The folllowing (just step 1 and 4) should be fine:
Such bad luck! My computer has a much easier IPv6 address, ::1
The Google Translation says that LOFAR has made unique observations, which in context I understand to mean as measurements, not the same as saying that it has grabbed the first images. Also, there are no jpgs of pulsars in TFA, so show us the money!
Any Netherlanders who could kindly clarify this?
Sure, but it's a bit of a trick question. I think you're right in that there have no images been gathered yet. I think Google Translation is right in translating 'waarnemingen' by 'observations'. Since English isn't my first language, I did a lookup to verify that 'observation' doen't necessarily mean something that results in an image, and indeed the second meaning the Merriam Webster gives is 'an act of recognizing and noting a fact or occurrence often involving measurement with instrument'.
Offtopic: Congratulations with your son, and I hope the climate, in a decad, will indeed allow skating on the canals...
It's up to the parent to decide whether or not these bribes actually add to the overall success of their child in the long run. It will take some convincing for me to think this is likely.
OK, let me try that. I'm a parent of three kids, two of them in this age group. They're at a Dutch school, and receive grades four times a year, and I pay them an amount of money depending on their grades. Grades here in the Netherlands range from 10 (A, perfect) to 1 (F, couldn't be worse) with 6 being acceptable (C?). The oldest one receive €20,- for each 10, €10,- for each 9, while I get a 'discount' for everything below 6. My reasoning behind this is simple: while they're at school, I want them to consider this their 'work', that is, I want them to take it seriously. One way of showing them that this is serious to me is the same way is my boss does that to me: by paying for it. Of course it's not the only thing that we, trying to be responsible parents trying to give them a good start in life etcetera are doing; but it is one of them. It seems to work fine. The oldest is top of hist class (without being too snotty) and the youngest is about average, which, frankly, is above previous expectations, since he's simply less talented than his older brother (and therefore is payed slightly different too) . I know from personal experience that it motivates them to some extent, and there's another practical reason for doing this: they have a fair chance of making some pocket money without having to take a 'do you want fries with this' type of job that would certainly cost them a lot of time I'd rather have them spend on school work.
I realize this does in no way prove these payments will add to 'their overall success in the long run', but I'm convinced that, at least in our case, it does play a positive role in their chances of successfully finishing their school, probably with somewhat higher grades than they'd otherwise have had. Clearly it's not all you can do as a parent, but it is an option, and it can work out well. I'm not surprised research seems to support this at all.
Also, in general: is there any reason why a stick should be preferred over a carrot?
I don't doubt the submitter's ability to adapt. The fact that he (lunchlady? her?) is considered for promotion already proves he is doing fine at his current position.
But nobody is good at everything. I got the impression that being 'forced into a non-technical role' is the major issue here. The fact that the submitter isn't looking forward to this, may very well (and I admit this is a guess) be caused by the prospect of being moved into a position he won't be functioning too well, because he happens to have a skill set that just isn't a very good match for it.
Sounds like a nice example of the Peter Principle in action.
Can't you persuade management that (which i assume is part of your problem, apart from the working hours thing) you simply won't be the right person for this job, and that you'd rather keep doing something that you are good at?
Now the Scientologists will just edit it from their homes.
But that only applies to those that can still afford such luxuries as homes and computers.
Is it still legal to breathe there?