I would rather have my civil liberties. And stealing music has nothing to do with them. Just some propaganda bullshit thrown in to make a persons civil liberties seem unimportant or even bad. You are also trying to say that we either have civil liberties or security, which is bullshit as well. Even if that choice had to be made, which it doesn't, I'd rather have the blood of my countrymen on my hands than lack liberty, at least I would know that they died for a country worth dying for.
You wouldn't believe how many loyal (and usually ignorant) customers Microsoft has. By hanging around slashdot I'm sure you will not notice them. But go browse MS oriented news sites. Most people don't care about things being proprietary or not and have little understanding of the open source philosophy at best. They are praised for the very things the slashdot community boo them for. He's an example;
Neowin: Microsoft has enabled Information Rights Management technology. This will make your e-mail and documents more secure. Yay Microsoft!
slashdot/slashdot crowd: Microsoft has now enabled DRM to lock people to their office suit and force people to use their OS...
-
Betanews: Mozilla 1.3 has been released... Comments: yuk y would u use nutscrape!@! this is just like nutscrape! IE forever!! aohell suxx0rz!
slashdot: Mozilla 1.3 has been released... Comments: Cool, I esspecially like...
-
Neowin: Red Hat to release a new Enterprise Server product for $300-$800/year Comments: y would u pay for something that u can download for free?! i thought linux was freeware
slashdot: Red Hat to release new Enterprise Server Comments: Hopefully this will be able to help Red Hat in its fight against Microsoft in the server market...
-
Anyways, I'm sure you get the general idea. So to put it simply: Dream on.
Why should my company buy MS Office if the documents it produces are exactly the same as those of FreeBeerOffice?
That is basically the point. If they can't ensure market share by forcing people into using their product by playing games with their file format, then they would actually have to make sure the product is improved or better than the competitor. But when they can just lock people into the office suit by refusing to release any specs for the file format, and purposely creating crippled output when saved as another format (e.g. XML).
But forcing them to gain and maintain market share by ensuring their product improves and is better than their competitors' product is restricting Microsoft's "freedom to inovate"... [/sarcasm off]
Why upgrade to anything? Windows 95 should work fine as a basic workstation to do whatever writing and reports you need. I can't see why you would need to upgrade to anything. I guess I can see how it would be a big deal to the nazish open source zealots who are appalled by the use of evil closed source programs. But all in all there really is no reason they should need to upgrade. Seems like a waste of the state's already feeble funds.
-./ disclamer for the thin-skinned: Btw, don't get me wrong. I am an open source advocate myself, but some people get a little nuts about it imho. But feel free to +1 troll if you must.
Go take economics 101, then explain to me how bush's tax cuts are bad for the poor.
Because when a rich guy gets a $40,000 check, and a poor guy gets a $20 check, and in exchange for that $20 check, government services, which he (being average joe poor guy) relies on get cut. That's how it is bad for the poor.
Not only that, who gets to decide who is rich(evil) and who isn't.
Well it's simple really. I am surprised you, having taken economics 101, do not know this. You take the top 10%-20% or so of the incomes of the people, and those people could be determined rich. Now nobody is implying that the rich are somehow evil, although it is funny that is a word that you would bring into the conversation when refering to the rich. Anyways, the richest people are very good, mostly due to the fact that they provide jobs. But when you are giving those people new BMW worth of a tax rebate, and giving the poor a few extra value meals at McDonnald's worth of money, and in exchange government services that those people rely on are cut, it is not good. The rich could care less, they can afford their own services, but it is the poor who rely most heavily on the services that end up getting cut.
I think it is very bigoted to basically have the additude that it is bad for a government to help its people. I happen to be proud of our government for the help it has provided for its less fortunate citizens.
Of course I think we should just go bad the the fudual days where there were no government services and if you were born a pesent, tough luck, you can't afford school, medical care, etc... you are just shit outta' luck. Yeah those were the days. That's what a *real* American would strive for. Government services are just communist!
laff
Also, just for reference, there is not now, nor has there has been, a communist country. There have been dictatorships that like to call themselfs communist, but there has been no truely communist country. I would suggest you read Animal Farm by George Orwell. So there is really no communist country that has "built walls to hold the people in" because there is not, and has never been, a communist country.
The best thing for oil prices and the economy would be for us to cool it and say "ok, Iraq's complying, everything's fine". If this were about oil, that's what we'd do - that's what would make our own oil companies happy.
No, the best thing for us economically, and our oil companies, would be for us to occupy Iraq and have our oil companies control the oil found in the region.
Israel has not killed 150,000 of its own people with mustard gas and VX. This is what boggles my mind when people make these ridiculous comparisons between Iraq and any other country, or between Saddam Hussein and any other world leader.
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/tiananmen/ "Twelve years ago the Chinese Government lost patience with a student movement calling for democracy in Tiananmen square. They ordered the peoples army to turn their weapons on the people. he bloody suppression of the students effectively smashed the pro- democracy movement and drove dissent underground."
China killed thousands of people, including chilren. They ran the protesters over with tanks, including a pregnent woman, and sprayed the croud with automatic weapons. And the whole while it was being broadcast live to our living rooms via CNN (and other networks). Thousands upon thousands of people died in that attack. The only thing that Bush Sr. did was scold China and he stopped us from buying military hats from China for a few months. Now Iraq kills its own people, and suddenly we want to declare ourselfs the saviors of the world's people *puke* Yeah, right. No altierior motives involved in that *rolls eyes*.
Israel has violated UN declarations as well, you never see us huff and puff about them. Probably because there is no significant amount of oil, if any, in Isreal. North Korea readily admits to developing a nuclear program and defying the US, and we don't care too much about them either (no oil). China launches takes and uses its army to kill its own people, including children, it is broadcast live to our livingrooms, and they just get scoled by Bush Sr. "Bad china! Don't do that again!" (No oil). Now when we are in a very depressing economic situation isn't it convenient that the Bush Administration is pulling Iraq out of their hat again. Nothing like bringing up Iraq changes the subject so well eh? Well at least Bushinomics are bringing tax cuts for the rich. Of course the masses are too busy being destracted by Bush and all of his war mongering.
Both of those reports are reffering directly to ozone generators. They are not just talking about ozone dangers in general. They are written up specifically about ozone generators.
Let ME repeate: I WAS using DRI. Let me simplify this for you as I can see this is very difficult for you to understand:
1. I install Linux. 2. I use the nv open source drivers. 3. I enable DRI. 4. I run tuxracer and I get 1-3fps.
5. I disable DRI. 6. I download nvidia's official drivers (nvidia) 7. I install the nvidia drivers 8. I run tuxracer and I get 60-70fps.
Let me repeat: I enable DRI, just in case you didn't see that, I enable DRI, then, after I have enabled DRI, and DRI is running and enabled, I start tuxracer, meanwhile DRI is enabled, I get about 1-3fps in tuxracer while DRI is enabled and I am not using the official nvidia drivers, this is all while DRI is enabled, and through the process discussed in this particular paragraph DRI happened to be enabled the whole time. Also, DRI was enabled.
No, but while I'm using nvidia's drivers I get 60-70fps in most games, meanwhile with DRI I get framerates such as 1-3fps which is unplayable. There is no need to be so nazish about open source. If the product delivers preformance that is that much greater, I don't see why you need to get on a high horse and throw your nose up in the air at it.
"As has been pointed out elsewhere's on the thread, several posters here have anecdotals of using ozone to treat water, an alternative that eliminates the use of chlorine based chemicals that leave dioxin..."
Ozone has been extensively used for water purification, but ozone chemistry in water is not the same as ozone chemistry in air. (EPA)
"No one has ever suggested one should attach a hose directly to the output and run it through to a mask and breathe pure ozone."
Current evidence of the health effects of ozone suggests that there is no "safe" threshold concentration for the onset of health responses due to exposure above background ozone concentrations...In addition, persons with asthma have increased susceptibility to ozone and exposure to low concentrations results in increased symptoms, medications use and hospitalizations.
This would indicate that it does not take more than "above background levels" of ozone to harm the human respetory system, and it esspecially dangerous for those with asthma. And the EPA states that "ozone concentrations would have to be 5 - 10 times higher than public health standards allow before the ozone could decontaminate the air sufficiently." (EPA) So you are either saying that the ozone generators 'they' sell are either not dangerous to humans and ineffective at decontaminating the air, or harmful to humans and able to decontaminate the air; which is it? And before you pull out your 'but this is a different kind of ozone' BS remember "There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices." (American Lung Association)
"It works as advertised and is suitable for the situations they outline on their page. this isn't all that exotic of a tech in general, for instance, ozone is used commercially by smoke damage companies, and by places with bad odors being associated with their work, like meat packing plants, etc, and it's well established."
This is simply due to the fact that ozone itself has a distinct smell to it. Practically anything with a distictive smell could be used in place of ozone, which is an unstable oxygen molecule that wrecks havok on the human respetory system. As far as its use by smoke damage companies, this is done while nobody is occupying the building.
If you look at http://www.aranizer.com/producti.asp and see their pictures of the ozone molecule destroying a pollutant, remember that it does this to any particle that it comes in contact to. So when you breath this particle in and it starts attacking your lung cells causing decreases in lung function, aggravation of asthma, throat irritation and cough, inflammation of lung tissue, chest pain and shortness of breath, and even higher susceptibility to respiratory infection due to the fact that the unstable oxygen molecules attack white blood cells. Oh yeah, let me go out and buy one of these things right away! Or better yet, let me fuck over some people's respitory systems and make asthma victoms' lives a living hell just to make a quick buck.
"I do know for example in areas that are experiencing the incredibly harmful 'black mold' in walls of buildings that sometimes ozone treatments are really the only thing that is effective, short of just tearing the buildings down and throwing them away."
Yes, this is fine while nobody is occupying the building. "...when people are not present, are sometimes used to help decontaminate an unoccupied space from certain chemical or biological contaminants or odors (e.g., fire restoration). However, little is known about the chemical by-products left behind by these processes (Dunston and Spivak, 1997). While high concentrations of ozone in air may sometimes be appropriate in these circumstances, conditions should be sufficiently controlled to insure that no person or pet becomes exposed." (EPA)
Also the fact that you would try to insult our intelligence by claiming you have no ties to them is a joke. And judging by the shitty web design work this "company" more then likely is nothing more than a quack fly-by-night company ran out of some guys' basement. At least no type of reputable company that could afford to contract any decent website designer.
American Lung Association: Ozone is a potent lung irritant and exposure to elevated levels is a contributor to the exacerbation of lung disease; it is especially dangerous for persons with asthma and other chronic lung diseases, children, and the elderly. Residential indoor ozone is produced directly by ozone generators and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air cleaners. There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action in 1995 against two manufacturers of ozone generating devices. The FTC charged that they made unsubstantiated claims about the ability of their products to clean air of various indoor air pollutants and to prevent or relieve allergies, asthma and other conditions.
Consumer Reports (1992), the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (Boeniger, 1995), and the U.S. EPA (1995) concluded that tabletop and room unit ozone generators are not effective in improving indoor air quality. Studies have found that while some indoor air pollutant concentrations decline in the presence of ozone, other pollutants increase. In fact, upon reaction with ozone, some previously undetected, toxic chemicals emerge in indoor air, including formaldehyde and other alehydes (Boeniger, 1995).
There is a lack of evidence in the scientific literature that would support the effectiveness of ozone at low concentrations in removing organic contaminants from indoor air (Boeniger, 1995). A recent study by the U.S. EPA demonstrates that ozone is not effective for killing airborne molds and fungi even at high concentrations (6-9 ppm) (U.S. EPA, 1995). At higher concentrations, especially above 0.08 ppm, ozone is a potent irritant that can bring about diminished lung function, cough, inflammation associated with biochemical changes, and *increased* responsiveness to allergens (Horstman, et al., 1990). http://www.alaw.org/air_quality/information_and_ referral/indoor_air_quality/ozone_generatiors.html
EPA: Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is misleading.
...a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process with ozone may take months or years...contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are not effective in removing carbon monoxide or formaldehyde...
...for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products.
ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies
Ozone is not considered useful for odor removal in building ventilation systems
When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections.
Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone generators can exceed health standards even when one follows manufacturer's instructions.
The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive.
http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html
Ozone generators are nothing but a dangerous scam.
Re:Ozone also gives a nice mellow high
on
Ozone As Pesticide
·
· Score: 0, Redundant
American Lung Association: Ozone is a potent lung irritant and exposure to elevated levels is a contributor to the exacerbation of lung disease; it is especially dangerous for persons with asthma and other chronic lung diseases, children, and the elderly. Residential indoor ozone is produced directly by ozone generators and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air cleaners. There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action in 1995 against two manufacturers of ozone generating devices. The FTC charged that they made unsubstantiated claims about the ability of their products to clean air of various indoor air pollutants and to prevent or relieve allergies, asthma and other conditions.
Consumer Reports (1992), the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (Boeniger, 1995), and the U.S. EPA (1995) concluded that tabletop and room unit ozone generators are not effective in improving indoor air quality. Studies have found that while some indoor air pollutant concentrations decline in the presence of ozone, other pollutants increase. In fact, upon reaction with ozone, some previously undetected, toxic chemicals emerge in indoor air, including formaldehyde and other alehydes (Boeniger, 1995).
There is a lack of evidence in the scientific literature that would support the effectiveness of ozone at low concentrations in removing organic contaminants from indoor air (Boeniger, 1995). A recent study by the U.S. EPA demonstrates that ozone is not effective for killing airborne molds and fungi even at high concentrations (6-9 ppm) (U.S. EPA, 1995). At higher concentrations, especially above 0.08 ppm, ozone is a potent irritant that can bring about diminished lung function, cough, inflammation associated with biochemical changes, and *increased* responsiveness to allergens (Horstman, et al., 1990). http://www.alaw.org./air_quality/information_and _referral/indoor_air_quality/ozone_generatiors.htm l
EPA: Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is misleading.
...a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process with ozone may take months or years...contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are not effective in removing carbon monoxide or formaldehyde...
...for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products.
ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies
Ozone is not considered useful for odor removal in building ventilation systems
When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections.
Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone generators can exceed health standards even when one follows manufacturer's instructions.
The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive.
http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html
Ozone generators are nothing but a dangerous scam.
American Lung Association: Ozone is a potent lung irritant and exposure to elevated levels is a contributor to the exacerbation of lung disease; it is especially dangerous for persons with asthma and other chronic lung diseases, children, and the elderly. Residential indoor ozone is produced directly by ozone generators and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air cleaners. There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action in 1995 against two manufacturers of ozone generating devices. The FTC charged that they made unsubstantiated claims about the ability of their products to clean air of various indoor air pollutants and to prevent or relieve allergies, asthma and other conditions.
Consumer Reports (1992), the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (Boeniger, 1995), and the U.S. EPA (1995) concluded that tabletop and room unit ozone generators are not effective in improving indoor air quality. Studies have found that while some indoor air pollutant concentrations decline in the presence of ozone, other pollutants increase. In fact, upon reaction with ozone, some previously undetected, toxic chemicals emerge in indoor air, including formaldehyde and other alehydes (Boeniger, 1995).
There is a lack of evidence in the scientific literature that would support the effectiveness of ozone at low concentrations in removing organic contaminants from indoor air (Boeniger, 1995). A recent study by the U.S. EPA demonstrates that ozone is not effective for killing airborne molds and fungi even at high concentrations (6-9 ppm) (U.S. EPA, 1995). At higher concentrations, especially above 0.08 ppm, ozone is a potent irritant that can bring about diminished lung function, cough, inflammation associated with biochemical changes, and *increased* responsiveness to allergens (Horstman, et al., 1990). http://www.alaw.org/air_quality/information_and_ referral/indoor_air_quality/ozone_generatiors.html
EPA: Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is misleading.
...a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process with ozone may take months or years...contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are not effective in removing carbon monoxide or formaldehyde...
...for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products.
ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies
Ozone is not considered useful for odor removal in building ventilation systems
When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections.
Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone generators can exceed health standards even when one follows manufacturer's instructions.
The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive.
http://www.epa.gov./iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html
Ozone generators are nothing but a dangerous scam.
American Lung Association: Ozone is a potent lung irritant and exposure to elevated levels is a contributor to the exacerbation of lung disease; it is especially dangerous for persons with asthma and other chronic lung diseases, children, and the elderly. Residential indoor ozone is produced directly by ozone generators and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air cleaners. There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action in 1995 against two manufacturers of ozone generating devices. The FTC charged that they made unsubstantiated claims about the ability of their products to clean air of various indoor air pollutants and to prevent or relieve allergies, asthma and other conditions.
Consumer Reports (1992), the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (Boeniger, 1995), and the U.S. EPA (1995) concluded that tabletop and room unit ozone generators are not effective in improving indoor air quality. Studies have found that while some indoor air pollutant concentrations decline in the presence of ozone, other pollutants increase. In fact, upon reaction with ozone, some previously undetected, toxic chemicals emerge in indoor air, including formaldehyde and other alehydes (Boeniger, 1995).
There is a lack of evidence in the scientific literature that would support the effectiveness of ozone at low concentrations in removing organic contaminants from indoor air (Boeniger, 1995). A recent study by the U.S. EPA demonstrates that ozone is not effective for killing airborne molds and fungi even at high concentrations (6-9 ppm) (U.S. EPA, 1995). At higher concentrations, especially above 0.08 ppm, ozone is a potent irritant that can bring about diminished lung function, cough, inflammation associated with biochemical changes, and *increased* responsiveness to allergens (Horstman, et al., 1990). http://www.alaw.org/air_quality/information_and_ referral/indoor_air_quality/ozone_generatiors.html
EPA: Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is misleading.
...a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process with ozone may take months or years...contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are not effective in removing carbon monoxide or formaldehyde...
...for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products.
ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies
Ozone is not considered useful for odor removal in building ventilation systems
When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections.
Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone generators can exceed health standards even when one follows manufacturer's instructions.
The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive.
http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html
Ozone generators are nothing but a dangerous scam.
I'm sorry, but while simply using DRI and X's default nvidia drivers (nv), Mesa demo's run at around 10fps if I make the window small enough. While using nvidia's drivers (nvidia), which make you disable the DRI extention in your x config, I get about 60-70fps when I make the window fill up almost my entire screen.
Now while trying to play any games, like tuxracer, it is simply unplayable. I get 3-4fps max just while I'm at the *menu*. I can bearly navigate the menu to start a race, let along after I start one and the framerate drops to 1-2fps. Now after I install the official nvidia drivers (which one again require you to disable the dri extention, and yes I'm aware that they may use a similar method inside the nvidia driver, but they do not use dri.sf.net's extention) I get 60-70fps throughout the entire game and it is actually playable. I have had similar experiences with other OpenGL games.
Hell even while using the 3-d spectrograph plugin in XMMS I get bad preforomance using DRI, but while using the official nvidia drivers and disable DRI(.sf.net) it runs *extremely* fast (granted it is a very simple thing to render and/should/).
I don't know why anyone in their right mind would choose DRI.sf.net's extentions over nvidia's official drivers (which make you disable DRI.sf.net's extention). I don't even know how the people who created the DRI.sf.net project manage to put up with the *extremely* shitty preformance.
The idea is that if it cost a modest $.1 to send someone an e-mail, it would not bother your friends and whatnot as I'm sure they can afford a dime, or you could whitelist them so they don't have to pay anything. But when it comes to spammers trying to send out 20 million junk e-mail's, it would cost them around $200,000. That would almost totally, if not totally, elimate spam. That is what he is getting at. He is not just saying, well let's charge them so you can get payed to read spam.
Slashdot Mirror
I feel it is my responsibility as a countrymen to fight to protect the civil liberties of my countrymen.
I would rather have my civil liberties. And stealing music has nothing to do with them. Just some propaganda bullshit thrown in to make a persons civil liberties seem unimportant or even bad. You are also trying to say that we either have civil liberties or security, which is bullshit as well. Even if that choice had to be made, which it doesn't, I'd rather have the blood of my countrymen on my hands than lack liberty, at least I would know that they died for a country worth dying for.
You wouldn't believe how many loyal (and usually ignorant) customers Microsoft has. By hanging around slashdot I'm sure you will not notice them. But go browse MS oriented news sites. Most people don't care about things being proprietary or not and have little understanding of the open source philosophy at best. They are praised for the very things the slashdot community boo them for. He's an example;
Neowin: Microsoft has enabled Information Rights Management technology. This will make your e-mail and documents more secure. Yay Microsoft!
slashdot/slashdot crowd: Microsoft has now enabled DRM to lock people to their office suit and force people to use their OS...
-
Betanews: Mozilla 1.3 has been released...
Comments: yuk y would u use nutscrape!@! this is just like nutscrape! IE forever!! aohell suxx0rz!
slashdot: Mozilla 1.3 has been released...
Comments: Cool, I esspecially like...
-
Neowin: Red Hat to release a new Enterprise Server product for $300-$800/year
Comments: y would u pay for something that u can download for free?! i thought linux was freeware
slashdot: Red Hat to release new Enterprise Server
Comments: Hopefully this will be able to help Red Hat in its fight against Microsoft in the server market...
-
Anyways, I'm sure you get the general idea. So to put it simply: Dream on.
Why should my company buy MS Office if the documents it produces are exactly the same as those of FreeBeerOffice?
That is basically the point. If they can't ensure market share by forcing people into using their product by playing games with their file format, then they would actually have to make sure the product is improved or better than the competitor. But when they can just lock people into the office suit by refusing to release any specs for the file format, and purposely creating crippled output when saved as another format (e.g. XML).
But forcing them to gain and maintain market share by ensuring their product improves and is better than their competitors' product is restricting Microsoft's "freedom to inovate"... [/sarcasm off]
Well that seems much more logical. Thanks for ruining the "Damn, that's cool" factor :p
Why upgrade to anything? Windows 95 should work fine as a basic workstation to do whatever writing and reports you need. I can't see why you would need to upgrade to anything. I guess I can see how it would be a big deal to the nazish open source zealots who are appalled by the use of evil closed source programs. But all in all there really is no reason they should need to upgrade. Seems like a waste of the state's already feeble funds.
./ disclamer for the thin-skinned: Btw, don't get me wrong. I am an open source advocate myself, but some people get a little nuts about it imho. But feel free to +1 troll if you must.
-
lol, yeah I was obviously having an issue there.
Go take economics 101, then explain to me how bush's tax cuts are bad for the poor.
Because when a rich guy gets a $40,000 check, and a poor guy gets a $20 check, and in exchange for that $20 check, government services, which he (being average joe poor guy) relies on get cut. That's how it is bad for the poor.
Not only that, who gets to decide who is rich(evil) and who isn't.
Well it's simple really. I am surprised you, having taken economics 101, do not know this. You take the top 10%-20% or so of the incomes of the people, and those people could be determined rich. Now nobody is implying that the rich are somehow evil, although it is funny that is a word that you would bring into the conversation when refering to the rich. Anyways, the richest people are very good, mostly due to the fact that they provide jobs. But when you are giving those people new BMW worth of a tax rebate, and giving the poor a few extra value meals at McDonnald's worth of money, and in exchange government services that those people rely on are cut, it is not good. The rich could care less, they can afford their own services, but it is the poor who rely most heavily on the services that end up getting cut.
I think it is very bigoted to basically have the additude that it is bad for a government to help its people. I happen to be proud of our government for the help it has provided for its less fortunate citizens.
Of course I think we should just go bad the the fudual days where there were no government services and if you were born a pesent, tough luck, you can't afford school, medical care, etc... you are just shit outta' luck. Yeah those were the days. That's what a *real* American would strive for. Government services are just communist!
laff
Also, just for reference, there is not now, nor has there has been, a communist country. There have been dictatorships that like to call themselfs communist, but there has been no truely communist country. I would suggest you read Animal Farm by George Orwell. So there is really no communist country that has "built walls to hold the people in" because there is not, and has never been, a communist country.
The best thing for oil prices and the economy would be for us to cool it and say "ok, Iraq's complying, everything's fine". If this were about oil, that's what we'd do - that's what would make our own oil companies happy.
No, the best thing for us economically, and our oil companies, would be for us to occupy Iraq and have our oil companies control the oil found in the region.
Israel has not killed 150,000 of its own people with mustard gas and VX. This is what boggles my mind when people make these ridiculous comparisons between Iraq and any other country, or between Saddam Hussein and any other world leader.
http://edition.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/tiananmen/
"Twelve years ago the Chinese Government lost patience with a student movement calling for democracy in Tiananmen square. They ordered the peoples army to turn their weapons on the people. he bloody suppression of the students effectively smashed the pro- democracy movement and drove dissent underground."
China killed thousands of people, including chilren. They ran the protesters over with tanks, including a pregnent woman, and sprayed the croud with automatic weapons. And the whole while it was being broadcast live to our living rooms via CNN (and other networks). Thousands upon thousands of people died in that attack. The only thing that Bush Sr. did was scold China and he stopped us from buying military hats from China for a few months. Now Iraq kills its own people, and suddenly we want to declare ourselfs the saviors of the world's people *puke* Yeah, right. No altierior motives involved in that *rolls eyes*.
Israel has violated UN declarations as well, you never see us huff and puff about them. Probably because there is no significant amount of oil, if any, in Isreal. North Korea readily admits to developing a nuclear program and defying the US, and we don't care too much about them either (no oil). China launches takes and uses its army to kill its own people, including children, it is broadcast live to our livingrooms, and they just get scoled by Bush Sr. "Bad china! Don't do that again!" (No oil). Now when we are in a very depressing economic situation isn't it convenient that the Bush Administration is pulling Iraq out of their hat again. Nothing like bringing up Iraq changes the subject so well eh? Well at least Bushinomics are bringing tax cuts for the rich. Of course the masses are too busy being destracted by Bush and all of his war mongering.
Ah, I see. So with ATI on the other hand they have enough information to create good DRI drivers that actually take advantage of the hardware?
Both of those reports are reffering directly to ozone generators. They are not just talking about ozone dangers in general. They are written up specifically about ozone generators.
Let ME repeate: I WAS using DRI. Let me simplify this for you as I can see this is very difficult for you to understand:
1. I install Linux.
2. I use the nv open source drivers.
3. I enable DRI.
4. I run tuxracer and I get 1-3fps.
5. I disable DRI.
6. I download nvidia's official drivers (nvidia)
7. I install the nvidia drivers
8. I run tuxracer and I get 60-70fps.
Let me repeat: I enable DRI, just in case you didn't see that, I enable DRI, then, after I have enabled DRI, and DRI is running and enabled, I start tuxracer, meanwhile DRI is enabled, I get about 1-3fps in tuxracer while DRI is enabled and I am not using the official nvidia drivers, this is all while DRI is enabled, and through the process discussed in this particular paragraph DRI happened to be enabled the whole time. Also, DRI was enabled.
P.S. DRI was enabled in the last paragraph.
No, but while I'm using nvidia's drivers I get 60-70fps in most games, meanwhile with DRI I get framerates such as 1-3fps which is unplayable. There is no need to be so nazish about open source. If the product delivers preformance that is that much greater, I don't see why you need to get on a high horse and throw your nose up in the air at it.
DRI: "The Direct Rendering Infrastructure, also known as the DRI, is a framework for allowing direct access to graphics hardware..."
That's right, while using DRI I was not using hardware rendering support. *rolls eyes*
Ozone has been extensively used for water purification, but ozone chemistry in water is not the same as ozone chemistry in air. (EPA)
Current evidence of the health effects of ozone suggests that there is no "safe" threshold concentration for the onset of health responses due to exposure above background ozone concentrations...In addition, persons with asthma have increased susceptibility to ozone and exposure to low concentrations results in increased symptoms, medications use and hospitalizations.
This would indicate that it does not take more than "above background levels" of ozone to harm the human respetory system, and it esspecially dangerous for those with asthma. And the EPA states that "ozone concentrations would have to be 5 - 10 times higher than public health standards allow before the ozone could decontaminate the air sufficiently." (EPA) So you are either saying that the ozone generators 'they' sell are either not dangerous to humans and ineffective at decontaminating the air, or harmful to humans and able to decontaminate the air; which is it? And before you pull out your 'but this is a different kind of ozone' BS remember "There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices." (American Lung Association)
This is simply due to the fact that ozone itself has a distinct smell to it. Practically anything with a distictive smell could be used in place of ozone, which is an unstable oxygen molecule that wrecks havok on the human respetory system. As far as its use by smoke damage companies, this is done while nobody is occupying the building.
If you look at http://www.aranizer.com/producti.asp and see their pictures of the ozone molecule destroying a pollutant, remember that it does this to any particle that it comes in contact to. So when you breath this particle in and it starts attacking your lung cells causing decreases in lung function, aggravation of asthma, throat irritation and cough, inflammation of lung tissue, chest pain and shortness of breath, and even higher susceptibility to respiratory infection due to the fact that the unstable oxygen molecules attack white blood cells. Oh yeah, let me go out and buy one of these things right away! Or better yet, let me fuck over some people's respitory systems and make asthma victoms' lives a living hell just to make a quick buck.
Yes, this is fine while nobody is occupying the building. "...when people are not present, are sometimes used to help decontaminate an unoccupied space from certain chemical or biological contaminants or odors (e.g., fire restoration). However, little is known about the chemical by-products left behind by these processes (Dunston and Spivak, 1997). While high concentrations of ozone in air may sometimes be appropriate in these circumstances, conditions should be sufficiently controlled to insure that no person or pet becomes exposed." (EPA)
Also the fact that you would try to insult our intelligence by claiming you have no ties to them is a joke. And judging by the shitty web design work this "company" more then likely is nothing more than a quack fly-by-night company ran out of some guys' basement. At least no type of reputable company that could afford to contract any decent website designer.
American Lung Association:
There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices.
American Lung Association :
_ referral/indoor_air_quality/ozone_generatiors.html
...a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process with ozone may take months or years...contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are not effective in removing carbon monoxide or formaldehyde...
...for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products.
Ozone is a potent lung irritant and exposure to elevated levels is a contributor to the exacerbation of lung disease; it is especially dangerous for persons with asthma and other chronic lung diseases, children, and the elderly. Residential indoor ozone is produced directly by ozone generators and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air cleaners. There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action in 1995 against two manufacturers of ozone generating devices. The FTC charged that they made unsubstantiated claims about the ability of their products to clean air of various indoor air pollutants and to prevent or relieve allergies, asthma and other conditions.
Consumer Reports (1992), the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (Boeniger, 1995), and the U.S. EPA (1995) concluded that tabletop and room unit ozone generators are not effective in improving indoor air quality. Studies have found that while some indoor air pollutant concentrations decline in the presence of ozone, other pollutants increase. In fact, upon reaction with ozone, some previously undetected, toxic chemicals emerge in indoor air, including formaldehyde and other alehydes (Boeniger, 1995).
There is a lack of evidence in the scientific literature that would support the effectiveness of ozone at low concentrations in removing organic contaminants from indoor air (Boeniger, 1995). A recent study by the U.S. EPA demonstrates that ozone is not effective for killing airborne molds and fungi even at high concentrations (6-9 ppm) (U.S. EPA, 1995). At higher concentrations, especially above 0.08 ppm, ozone is a potent irritant that can bring about diminished lung function, cough, inflammation associated with biochemical changes, and *increased* responsiveness to allergens (Horstman, et al., 1990).
http://www.alaw.org/air_quality/information_and
EPA:
Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is misleading.
ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies
Ozone is not considered useful for odor removal in building ventilation systems
When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections.
Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone generators can exceed health standards even when one follows manufacturer's instructions.
The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive. http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html
Ozone generators are nothing but a dangerous scam.
American Lung Association:
d _referral/indoor_air_quality/ozone_generatiors.htm l
...a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process with ozone may take months or years...contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are not effective in removing carbon monoxide or formaldehyde...
...for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products.
Ozone is a potent lung irritant and exposure to elevated levels is a contributor to the exacerbation of lung disease; it is especially dangerous for persons with asthma and other chronic lung diseases, children, and the elderly. Residential indoor ozone is produced directly by ozone generators and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air cleaners. There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action in 1995 against two manufacturers of ozone generating devices. The FTC charged that they made unsubstantiated claims about the ability of their products to clean air of various indoor air pollutants and to prevent or relieve allergies, asthma and other conditions.
Consumer Reports (1992), the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (Boeniger, 1995), and the U.S. EPA (1995) concluded that tabletop and room unit ozone generators are not effective in improving indoor air quality. Studies have found that while some indoor air pollutant concentrations decline in the presence of ozone, other pollutants increase. In fact, upon reaction with ozone, some previously undetected, toxic chemicals emerge in indoor air, including formaldehyde and other alehydes (Boeniger, 1995).
There is a lack of evidence in the scientific literature that would support the effectiveness of ozone at low concentrations in removing organic contaminants from indoor air (Boeniger, 1995). A recent study by the U.S. EPA demonstrates that ozone is not effective for killing airborne molds and fungi even at high concentrations (6-9 ppm) (U.S. EPA, 1995). At higher concentrations, especially above 0.08 ppm, ozone is a potent irritant that can bring about diminished lung function, cough, inflammation associated with biochemical changes, and *increased* responsiveness to allergens (Horstman, et al., 1990).
http://www.alaw.org./air_quality/information_an
EPA:
Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is misleading.
ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies
Ozone is not considered useful for odor removal in building ventilation systems
When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections.
Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone generators can exceed health standards even when one follows manufacturer's instructions.
The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive. http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html
Ozone generators are nothing but a dangerous scam.
American Lung Association:
_ referral/indoor_air_quality/ozone_generatiors.html
...a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process with ozone may take months or years...contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are not effective in removing carbon monoxide or formaldehyde...
...for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products.
Ozone is a potent lung irritant and exposure to elevated levels is a contributor to the exacerbation of lung disease; it is especially dangerous for persons with asthma and other chronic lung diseases, children, and the elderly. Residential indoor ozone is produced directly by ozone generators and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air cleaners. There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action in 1995 against two manufacturers of ozone generating devices. The FTC charged that they made unsubstantiated claims about the ability of their products to clean air of various indoor air pollutants and to prevent or relieve allergies, asthma and other conditions.
Consumer Reports (1992), the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (Boeniger, 1995), and the U.S. EPA (1995) concluded that tabletop and room unit ozone generators are not effective in improving indoor air quality. Studies have found that while some indoor air pollutant concentrations decline in the presence of ozone, other pollutants increase. In fact, upon reaction with ozone, some previously undetected, toxic chemicals emerge in indoor air, including formaldehyde and other alehydes (Boeniger, 1995).
There is a lack of evidence in the scientific literature that would support the effectiveness of ozone at low concentrations in removing organic contaminants from indoor air (Boeniger, 1995). A recent study by the U.S. EPA demonstrates that ozone is not effective for killing airborne molds and fungi even at high concentrations (6-9 ppm) (U.S. EPA, 1995). At higher concentrations, especially above 0.08 ppm, ozone is a potent irritant that can bring about diminished lung function, cough, inflammation associated with biochemical changes, and *increased* responsiveness to allergens (Horstman, et al., 1990).
http://www.alaw.org/air_quality/information_and
EPA:
Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is misleading.
ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies
Ozone is not considered useful for odor removal in building ventilation systems
When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections.
Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone generators can exceed health standards even when one follows manufacturer's instructions.
The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive. http://www.epa.gov./iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html
Ozone generators are nothing but a dangerous scam.
American Lung Association:
_ referral/indoor_air_quality/ozone_generatiors.html
...a review of scientific research shows that, for many of the chemicals commonly found in indoor environments, the reaction process with ozone may take months or years...contrary to specific claims by some vendors, ozone generators are not effective in removing carbon monoxide or formaldehyde...
...for many of the chemicals with which ozone does readily react, the reaction can form a variety of harmful or irritating by-products.
Ozone is a potent lung irritant and exposure to elevated levels is a contributor to the exacerbation of lung disease; it is especially dangerous for persons with asthma and other chronic lung diseases, children, and the elderly. Residential indoor ozone is produced directly by ozone generators and indirectly by ion generators and some other electronic air cleaners. There is no difference, despite some manufacturers' claims, between outdoor ozone and ozone produced by these devices.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) took action in 1995 against two manufacturers of ozone generating devices. The FTC charged that they made unsubstantiated claims about the ability of their products to clean air of various indoor air pollutants and to prevent or relieve allergies, asthma and other conditions.
Consumer Reports (1992), the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) (Boeniger, 1995), and the U.S. EPA (1995) concluded that tabletop and room unit ozone generators are not effective in improving indoor air quality. Studies have found that while some indoor air pollutant concentrations decline in the presence of ozone, other pollutants increase. In fact, upon reaction with ozone, some previously undetected, toxic chemicals emerge in indoor air, including formaldehyde and other alehydes (Boeniger, 1995).
There is a lack of evidence in the scientific literature that would support the effectiveness of ozone at low concentrations in removing organic contaminants from indoor air (Boeniger, 1995). A recent study by the U.S. EPA demonstrates that ozone is not effective for killing airborne molds and fungi even at high concentrations (6-9 ppm) (U.S. EPA, 1995). At higher concentrations, especially above 0.08 ppm, ozone is a potent irritant that can bring about diminished lung function, cough, inflammation associated with biochemical changes, and *increased* responsiveness to allergens (Horstman, et al., 1990).
http://www.alaw.org/air_quality/information_and
EPA:
Some manufacturers or vendors suggest that ozone will render almost every chemical contaminant harmless by producing a chemical reaction whose only by-products are carbon dioxide, oxygen and water. This is misleading.
ozone does not remove particles (e.g., dust and pollen) from the air, including the particles that cause most allergies
Ozone is not considered useful for odor removal in building ventilation systems
When inhaled, ozone can damage the lungs. Relatively low amounts of ozone can cause chest pain, coughing, shortness of breath and, throat irritation. It may also worsen chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma as well as compromise the ability of the body to fight respiratory infections.
Some studies show that ozone concentrations produced by ozone generators can exceed health standards even when one follows manufacturer's instructions.
The concentration of ozone would have to greatly exceed health standards to be effective in removing most indoor air contaminants. In the process of reacting with chemicals indoors, ozone can produce other chemicals that themselves can be irritating and corrosive. http://www.epa.gov/iaq/pubs/ozonegen.html
Ozone generators are nothing but a dangerous scam.
I'm sorry, but while simply using DRI and X's default nvidia drivers (nv), Mesa demo's run at around 10fps if I make the window small enough. While using nvidia's drivers (nvidia), which make you disable the DRI extention in your x config, I get about 60-70fps when I make the window fill up almost my entire screen.
/should/).
Now while trying to play any games, like tuxracer, it is simply unplayable. I get 3-4fps max just while I'm at the *menu*. I can bearly navigate the menu to start a race, let along after I start one and the framerate drops to 1-2fps. Now after I install the official nvidia drivers (which one again require you to disable the dri extention, and yes I'm aware that they may use a similar method inside the nvidia driver, but they do not use dri.sf.net's extention) I get 60-70fps throughout the entire game and it is actually playable. I have had similar experiences with other OpenGL games.
Hell even while using the 3-d spectrograph plugin in XMMS I get bad preforomance using DRI, but while using the official nvidia drivers and disable DRI(.sf.net) it runs *extremely* fast (granted it is a very simple thing to render and
I don't know why anyone in their right mind would choose DRI.sf.net's extentions over nvidia's official drivers (which make you disable DRI.sf.net's extention). I don't even know how the people who created the DRI.sf.net project manage to put up with the *extremely* shitty preformance.
The idea is that if it cost a modest $.1 to send someone an e-mail, it would not bother your friends and whatnot as I'm sure they can afford a dime, or you could whitelist them so they don't have to pay anything. But when it comes to spammers trying to send out 20 million junk e-mail's, it would cost them around $200,000. That would almost totally, if not totally, elimate spam. That is what he is getting at. He is not just saying, well let's charge them so you can get payed to read spam.