AutoCorrect not only allows you to fix common spelling errors automatically (using an autocorrect list that works similar to MS Office). You can also use it to define "abbreviations" for long bits of text you don't want to type repeatedly: addresses, instructions, HTML formatting characters, etc.
Slideshow is extremely useful for people who get a lot of pictures via email, and just want to look at them quickly.
I guess I misunderstood the topic. I was hoping that Google Earth had actually captured images of some of the atrocities. Maybe THAT would finally attract people's attention.
I hate legal mumbo-jumbo as much as the next guy, but from the very definitions you quoted Southwest Airlines is not the "place of public accomodation". It's a type of "public accomodation". The "place of public accomodation", according to the judge, would be a physical "place" run by the "public accomodation" of Southwest Airlines. Such as an airplane, or a ticket counter, or their corporate headquaters. Not the company itself.
The remaining legal issue would then pertain to whether the company's webserver location can be considered a "place of accomodation" and whether the website can be considered a service or privilege offered by that place. This judge evidently does not.
Not that I agree with the judge. But this is evidently a matter of legal interpretation rather than "insane" reasoning.
At our site, we use seven different flavors of UNIX, and I have never really had a problem with this. (And incidentally, I'm currently looking for an admin job in the Princeton area, on the slim chance that this impresses anyone)
Even if you occasionally have to take a moment to look up a command name or check the manpage for the proper syntax, this isn't going to slow you down all that much in the long run. The fundamental concepts tend to remain the same. (Actually, I've occasionally seen more headaches arise from upgrading the OS than from changing to a different UNIX vendor!)
The only major issue to deal with is when you're writing an application to be run on multiple OS. In this case, you may be in a world of frustration. But as long as each server is doing its own thing, and you're simply installing applications that are made to compile on the systems you're using, there's not much for you to worry about.
You can usually cut dead weight at a company pretty easily by organizing them in alphabetical order by title, and going down the list firing people until you have enough money to pay everybody else.
Chief comes before Programmer, Executive comes before Technical...
I knew that I was better off being a "Solaris Administrator" than an "AIX Administrator"! But apparently I'd be even better off knowing VMS or XENIX. Hmmm... Time to hit the books...
If you think Godford Park was actually about the murder, then you've kinda missed the point.
And that's part of what infuriated me. It has been marketed heavily as a "clever whodunit" and a "murder mystery". And it certainly is not. If people knew what it was about, nobody except a professional film critic would ever want to see it.
In truth, Gosford Park consists entirely of a series of scenes depicting the wide gap between the upper and lower class. That's it. There is virtually no plot, only interaction between the characters. How does something like that win an Oscar for Original Screenplay? I can live with nominations for acting, directing, costume design, etc. But to actually win the award for screenplay?
But it is possible to have a very secure Windows environent... Nimda, I Love You, and many other worms did not hit affect my company because we took security very seriously beforehand. Malicious attachments (.EXE,.SCR, etc) were banned long before I Love You came along.
Wait a minute. You strip malicious email attachments before they reach the client PCs, and your Windows boxes don't get infected from them, and you give Microsoft's OS credit for this?
Sure, you can avoid a virus on Windows if you never download one. But what if your users manage to download one anyway? Through a ZIP file perhaps, or on a floppy disk, or through one of IE's vulnerabilities? Uh oh...
By passing a law that prevents the sending of some kinds of email, the government is limiting the free speech of both individuals and
companies.
Really? It's already illegal to send certain
kinds of regular mail. "Mail fraud" is in fact a serious crime. Threats may not be sent by mail,
either. Nor can you use it to harass someone.
Note that SPAM itself was not outlawed; it must
simply identify its source correctly. In this
case, the sender deliberately falsified the
source and the routing information. In my book,
that's somewhere between fraud and harassment.
Why should it be protected on the Internet when
it wouldn't be elsewhere?
Am I alone in thinking that this Slashdot story is part
of Danny's experiment? (If not part of his
advertising strategy?)
Seriously, the quality of this "experiment" is so
poor that it should never have been accepted as a Slashdot story. Especially when the entire story is about wanting to draw traffic to the submitter's website.
This is beyond funny, and wandering into "surreal" territory.
Slow down a minute. Despite the Slashdot summary
of the story, go and actually read it. They're
not talking about webcams, just giving parents
access to their children's student records.
This can only be a good thing. Let the parents
know if their kids are skipping school, or
failing English.
But I didn't see anything about monitoring
a person's activities or acquaintances. So
take a deep breath and relax.
Re:Who Is E-Mailing Our Kids Act
on
Congress@Work
·
· Score: 1
I do see your point, but I'm not sure if you
understand the point of the bill. It's not
trying to make email recipients lose their
anonymity, but rather those who are sending
the email to them.
In fact, most kids would still be able to browse the internet without identifying themselves. It's
just that they must identify themselves when
sending email to others.
Not that I'm in favor of the bill. But that's
mainly because we all know that it's virtually
impossible to block every "bad" thing on the internet. Don't we?
Re:I would outright disagree with most statements
on
David Korn Tells All
·
· Score: 1
No, the reason that perl programmers [...] tend to avoid calling external programs, or call them through modules, is twofold. First of all, those programs, while fairly small, still may do much more than you want to do...
The other issue, of course, is that I don't care to deal with interpreting the output of another command...
I can think of even more reasons why Perl programmers tend to avoid using the UNIX toolkit from within their code:
Why should we suffer the performance penalty of creating a child process if we can achieve the same functionality in Perl itself? (Don't we pay enough of a penalty when we start the Perl interpreter itself?)
We all like our code to be as portable as possible (as David Korn seems to agree). The UNIX toolkit may be portable from one UNIX to another (pretty much, anyway) but not when you port your code to Windows, MacOS, etc. If we keep our code in one "monolithic" Perl program, we can usually count on it being portable to nearly any operating system. Assuming it was written in a portable fashion to begin with, which is admittedly not all that common.
Slashdot Mirror
Slideshow is extremely useful for people who get a lot of pictures via email, and just want to look at them quickly.
I guess I misunderstood the topic. I was hoping that Google Earth had actually captured images of some of the atrocities. Maybe THAT would finally attract people's attention.
Maybe it happened the other way around:
Slate hears rumblings that Microsoft is looking to dump it. The editors say, "Well if we're on the chopping block anyway..."
The remaining legal issue would then pertain to whether the company's webserver location can be considered a "place of accomodation" and whether the website can be considered a service or privilege offered by that place. This judge evidently does not.
Not that I agree with the judge. But this is evidently a matter of legal interpretation rather than "insane" reasoning.
Even if you occasionally have to take a moment to look up a command name or check the manpage for the proper syntax, this isn't going to slow you down all that much in the long run. The fundamental concepts tend to remain the same. (Actually, I've occasionally seen more headaches arise from upgrading the OS than from changing to a different UNIX vendor!)
The only major issue to deal with is when you're writing an application to be run on multiple OS. In this case, you may be in a world of frustration. But as long as each server is doing its own thing, and you're simply installing applications that are made to compile on the systems you're using, there's not much for you to worry about.
I knew that I was better off being a "Solaris Administrator" than an "AIX Administrator"! But apparently I'd be even better off knowing VMS or XENIX. Hmmm... Time to hit the books...
If you think Godford Park was actually about the murder, then you've kinda missed the point.
And that's part of what infuriated me. It has been marketed heavily as a "clever whodunit" and a "murder mystery". And it certainly is not. If people knew what it was about, nobody except a professional film critic would ever want to see it.
In truth, Gosford Park consists entirely of a series of scenes depicting the wide gap between the upper and lower class. That's it. There is virtually no plot, only interaction between the characters. How does something like that win an Oscar for Original Screenplay? I can live with nominations for acting, directing, costume design, etc. But to actually win the award for screenplay?
A homosexual? In show business? Say it isn't so!
Odd that you think it matters, since you had no problem with his performance before you knew about this.
In fact I wonder if he would have won the Oscar if only more of the voters had known...
Here's the Google cached version of a Dave Barry article lampooning the masochistic Burger King execs.
So, if you can invent a matter transporter soon enough, you may still be able to sue Starfleet when the time comes.
I'd hate to think that my well-reasoned letter got labelled as simply "anti-Microsoft" without notifying me or labelling it as such...
Wait a minute. You strip malicious email attachments before they reach the client PCs, and your Windows boxes don't get infected from them, and you give Microsoft's OS credit for this?
Sure, you can avoid a virus on Windows if you never download one. But what if your users manage to download one anyway? Through a ZIP file perhaps, or on a floppy disk, or through one of IE's vulnerabilities? Uh oh...
After all, I've always wished there was a US state with the abbreviation R:
Ah, well...
Here is a link to an article about a Perl project to help the disabled. It contains a link to the project's website, as well.
According to the article (which I'm sure you read, right?), the feature WILL be disabled by default in the final release.
Really? It's already illegal to send certain kinds of regular mail. "Mail fraud" is in fact a serious crime. Threats may not be sent by mail, either. Nor can you use it to harass someone.
Note that SPAM itself was not outlawed; it must simply identify its source correctly. In this case, the sender deliberately falsified the source and the routing information. In my book, that's somewhere between fraud and harassment. Why should it be protected on the Internet when it wouldn't be elsewhere?
Seriously, the quality of this "experiment" is so poor that it should never have been accepted as a Slashdot story. Especially when the entire story is about wanting to draw traffic to the submitter's website.
This is beyond funny, and wandering into "surreal" territory.
This can only be a good thing. Let the parents know if their kids are skipping school, or failing English.
But I didn't see anything about monitoring a person's activities or acquaintances. So take a deep breath and relax.
In fact, most kids would still be able to browse the internet without identifying themselves. It's just that they must identify themselves when sending email to others.
Not that I'm in favor of the bill. But that's mainly because we all know that it's virtually impossible to block every "bad" thing on the internet. Don't we?