Also try making fun of Macs a lot. That always brings Windows and *nix types together.
Four or five years ago, maybe, but now I see the *nix types buying Macs in record numbers (and I'm one of them). Look at the average Apple story on/. for examples (or just at the sheer number of Apple stories being posted on what was once a predominantly Linux-oriented site).
Sorry but relying on known broken mechanisms for your business isn't my problem.
Explain to me what's "known broken" about me sending mail from whatever SMTP server is most convenient for me? My web hosting company doesn't currently offer TLS with their SMTP service, so I choose to use my ISP's mail server. Why should I not be able to do this? (assume for a moment I don't control my own DNS, etc, which most people don't)
SPF is about raising the bar for spammers
No, it isn't. It's about preventing forgery. SPF advocates may consider my above scenario "forgery" but that doesn't make it so.
They should already be feeling the inadaquecy of this old style setup, since many mail servers automatically filter any message that appears to originate from a residential IP number.
What part of through their home ISP did you fail to understand? You seem to be talking about users making SMTP connections to the destintation hosts directly from their desktops. While this is not uncommon for people running their own mail servers, it clearly isn't what the OP was talking about. He obviously meant people using their ISP's SMTP server rather than their work's. This is extremely common, especially if said home ISP filters outbound port 25 traffic.
The rest of your post is based on this mistaken assumption.
A) I read over all of that at the time and I (and many others) came to the conclusion that there was nothing intentional about it. Serving up different CSS to different browsers is extremely common. Don't attribuite to malice what can be easier explained by cluelessness on the part of the MS web developers. B) Opera was claiming to be IE long before that, anway.
Yahoo has innovated alot more things then Google has, and bought less companies as well.
You obviously haven't been keeping count then. Yahoo buys everything it touches.
I think the numbers speak for themselves. Note that these lists are not official and therefore there may be omissions (I can spot one thing missing off Yahoo's list already, Webring, which was later spun off/sold again.
Yes and Yes. And let's not forget that not too long ago Yahoo's search was actually Google.
No one ever mentions that Yahoo doesn't even do their own searching. Even back in the '90s, weren't they using Alta Vista? (my memory may not serve me correctly, but I recall some relationship between the two)
Even Google isn't worth commuting to Mountain View from the East Bay. I did that for two months a while back (not for Google, but for another tech company in MV) and vowed to never do it again. My time and stress levels are more important to me.
If the job isn't in the East Bay or San Francisco, I'm not interested (I'm working in SF currently). My SO is currently commuting to Palo Alto for the summer and she recently decided the same thing.
The "extra sexual stimulation" is largely bullshit, with only a few women able to claim an increase in stimulation.
That certainly isn't my experience. The same goes for every pierced woman I've spoken to about it, and most of the men. Of course the type and placement of the piercing has a lot to do with it, as well as the individual. I think you need a large sample group.
It's been my experience that the only reason most kids are getting holes put in their body is because they think its cool.
How big was your sample, and why is it limited to "kids"? Of course kids are more likely to follow the crowd, this is true for any trend. Why don't you talk to adults about why they are getting pierced?
"Body Modification" is a marketing term used by cheap tattoo parlors who are selling an image.
"Body modification" is also a term used by those who are into tattoos, piercing, scarring, etc, who don't necessarily identify with the "modern primitive" culture (as well as some who do).
Poking holes in your body or getting the same generic tattoo that 500 other people have gotten is as much "body modification" as shooting out the tires and windows on your car is a vehicle modification.
And what about people who don't have the same generic tattoos, but create their own original designs? What about other forms of body modification? The fact that someone does something that's been done before by others does not mean they're just following a trend.
Try actually learning about something for a change, instead of begging someone to spoonfeed you information.
Bzzt, sorry. I've been getting tattooed since 1989 and pierced (not including simple earrings which I've had since the mid-'80s) since 1991. I am very familiar with the body modification community, culture, and history. My point was that the term "modern primitive" has been used to mean any number of things and has become somewhat a meaningless buzzword used by people who jumped on the tribal tattoo and nipple piercing bandwagon back in the '90s (there's your "generic tattoo that 500 other people have").
You originally said,
It's not "body modification". Either you're a modern primative - and proud of it - or you're just a pierced freak who wants to add holes to your head (and elsewhere) because it's the in thing to do.
"Modern primitive" means far less than "body modification". Plenty of people have very thoughtful, original, well-designed body art (whether tattoos, piercings, or whatever) without identifying with the "modern primitive" culture. Is there work somehow less valid?
How is OS X running exclusively on Apple hardware with an x86 chip any different than OS X running exclusively on Apple hardware with a PPC chip?
Unless Apple allows OS X to run on (and more importantly, be sold on and for) non-Apple hardware, they will be no more of a threat to Microsoft than they are now.
He can certainly witness that there's no money (or future) in selling an OS that attempts to compete with Windows (see also: anti-trust case, BeOS, etc).
I agree that it's a brilliant idea, but the relevant question is, why will it succeed this time if it failed last time?
Because restaurant delivery services are already a proven business. I worked for a startup company exactly like this back in the early '90s until we were bought out by our competition, a larger company providing the same service on the other side of the country who was expanding into our area. There are numerous other companies doing this as well. The only difference with the one in this story is that they're taking orders on-line instead of over the phone (and, reading over other comments, they aren't the first to do this).
Your example is absurd, as you know. My assumption about this person would be based on the subject matter itself, not on the fact that they have a tattooed forehead.
On the other hand, I would argue that Manwoman is neither a bigot nor a sociopath, but that's a bit outside the scope of the conversation.
Their feeling of uncomfortability is just as valid as your feeling of indignation, but you haven't given them the choice to not be uncomfortable (by not having a piercing/tatoo).
Both their feelings of discomfort and my feeling of indignation are due to their prejudices. My getting a tattoo or body piercing does not affect them in any real way. Their prejudice very well may very well directly affect me (by, for example, causing a potential employer not not hire me because he may lose the money he might otherwise get from said people).
EOE laws only matter when you can prove discrimination in court (which is almost never). And if you do sue and win, guess who is going to get skipped over when job promotions come.
So you advocate punishing people for standing up for their rights? Does this apply to racial minorities as well?
Frankly, I'm a little amazed that no one has called you on your utter bullshit yet.
Because 15-20% of piercings involve unforeseen complications (excessive bleeding, permanent deformation, infection and dental/gum/sense-of-taste damage with respect to tongue piercing),
Please provide a credible source for that percentage. I've seen you cite it twice but neither time have you offered a source for it. Further, I challenge you to find one case of "sense-of-taste damage" due to a tongue piercing.
not least due to the lack of proper medical training by the people who carry out this sort of cosmetic surgery.
I assume this applies to women with pierced ears as well? If you say it doesn't, please consider that most mainstream ear piercings are done by forcing a blunt object through the ear with a plastic (read: can't be sterilized) device similar to a hole punch that is then reused on everyone else that wanders into the store. Compare this to piercing the ear, or anything else, with a sterile, single-use needle by someone who's had far more training than the average jewelry store employee.
Please educate yourself before spouting off like this in the future. A couple good places to start are the rec.arts.bodyart FAQ and BME (NSFW).
The thing about tatoos and piercings is that they are usually visible
Not really, no. Consider that, in even business casual attire, far more of your body is covered up than not. I got my first tattoo in 1988 and have half a dozen or so now, including one large one on my back, but not until last year did I get one that's visible even when wearing a short sleeve shirt. The same is true for non-facial body piercings.
You got your tatoo or piercing knowing what the response would be so you really don't have a right to complain when you get that response.
I absolutely do have the right to complain about it. I think we can all agree that, ideally, people would not be discriminated against for making personal choices that affect no one else. So why shouldn't we complain if they do?
Not to mention that most of the links are to his Livejournal, not his own site. LJ gets many times the traffic that Slashdot does and handles it just fine.
If there's a list somewhere of things that prove yourself not a hacker in the slighest, "crying about a sound card not working then switching to a proprietary OS out of spite and laziness" is definitely on it.
Have you considered that some people don't care about "proving themselves a hacker" and just want a computer that's going to work consistently and reliably, without having to fuck around with every little thing when you could be getting stuff done?
If your computer is a hobby in itself, fine, but for many of us our computers are tool. A means to an end rather than the end itself.
I switched to OS X on my desktop two years ago and haven't looked back.
Slashdot Mirror
Also try making fun of Macs a lot. That always brings Windows and *nix types together.
/. for examples (or just at the sheer number of Apple stories being posted on what was once a predominantly Linux-oriented site).
Four or five years ago, maybe, but now I see the *nix types buying Macs in record numbers (and I'm one of them). Look at the average Apple story on
Sorry but relying on known broken mechanisms for your business isn't my problem.
Explain to me what's "known broken" about me sending mail from whatever SMTP server is most convenient for me? My web hosting company doesn't currently offer TLS with their SMTP service, so I choose to use my ISP's mail server. Why should I not be able to do this? (assume for a moment I don't control my own DNS, etc, which most people don't)
SPF is about raising the bar for spammers
No, it isn't. It's about preventing forgery. SPF advocates may consider my above scenario "forgery" but that doesn't make it so.
They should already be feeling the inadaquecy of this old style setup, since many mail servers automatically filter any message that appears to originate from a residential IP number.
What part of through their home ISP did you fail to understand? You seem to be talking about users making SMTP connections to the destintation hosts directly from their desktops. While this is not uncommon for people running their own mail servers, it clearly isn't what the OP was talking about. He obviously meant people using their ISP's SMTP server rather than their work's. This is extremely common, especially if said home ISP filters outbound port 25 traffic.
The rest of your post is based on this mistaken assumption.
A) I read over all of that at the time and I (and many others) came to the conclusion that there was nothing intentional about it. Serving up different CSS to different browsers is extremely common. Don't attribuite to malice what can be easier explained by cluelessness on the part of the MS web developers.
B) Opera was claiming to be IE long before that, anway.
Well, help a brother out then! :)
You know, I'll actually be at Google HQ this evening for a tour with a few SIMS students...
Yahoo has innovated alot more things then Google has, and bought less companies as well.
You obviously haven't been keeping count then. Yahoo buys everything it touches.
I think the numbers speak for themselves. Note that these lists are not official and therefore there may be omissions (I can spot one thing missing off Yahoo's list already, Webring, which was later spun off/sold again.
Yes and Yes. And let's not forget that not too long ago Yahoo's search was actually Google.
No one ever mentions that Yahoo doesn't even do their own searching. Even back in the '90s, weren't they using Alta Vista? (my memory may not serve me correctly, but I recall some relationship between the two)
Even Google isn't worth commuting to Mountain View from the East Bay. I did that for two months a while back (not for Google, but for another tech company in MV) and vowed to never do it again. My time and stress levels are more important to me.
If the job isn't in the East Bay or San Francisco, I'm not interested (I'm working in SF currently). My SO is currently commuting to Palo Alto for the summer and she recently decided the same thing.
Are you saying the Christiaity only started with the ministry of Jesus Christ?
Well, yes, actually. Where to you think the name came from?
The fact that it's an offshoot of Judaism doesn't mean that the religion itself is as old as Judaism.
It's slow?
The "extra sexual stimulation" is largely bullshit, with only a few women able to claim an increase in stimulation.
That certainly isn't my experience. The same goes for every pierced woman I've spoken to about it, and most of the men. Of course the type and placement of the piercing has a lot to do with it, as well as the individual. I think you need a large sample group.
It's been my experience that the only reason most kids are getting holes put in their body is because they think its cool.
How big was your sample, and why is it limited to "kids"? Of course kids are more likely to follow the crowd, this is true for any trend. Why don't you talk to adults about why they are getting pierced?
"Body Modification" is a marketing term used by cheap tattoo parlors who are selling an image.
"Body modification" is also a term used by those who are into tattoos, piercing, scarring, etc, who don't necessarily identify with the "modern primitive" culture (as well as some who do).
Poking holes in your body or getting the same generic tattoo that 500 other people have gotten is as much "body modification" as shooting out the tires and windows on your car is a vehicle modification.
And what about people who don't have the same generic tattoos, but create their own original designs? What about other forms of body modification? The fact that someone does something that's been done before by others does not mean they're just following a trend.
Try actually learning about something for a change, instead of begging someone to spoonfeed you information.
Bzzt, sorry. I've been getting tattooed since 1989 and pierced (not including simple earrings which I've had since the mid-'80s) since 1991. I am very familiar with the body modification community, culture, and history. My point was that the term "modern primitive" has been used to mean any number of things and has become somewhat a meaningless buzzword used by people who jumped on the tribal tattoo and nipple piercing bandwagon back in the '90s (there's your "generic tattoo that 500 other people have").
You originally said,
It's not "body modification". Either you're a modern primative - and proud of it - or you're just a pierced freak who wants to add holes to your head (and elsewhere) because it's the in thing to do.
"Modern primitive" means far less than "body modification". Plenty of people have very thoughtful, original, well-designed body art (whether tattoos, piercings, or whatever) without identifying with the "modern primitive" culture. Is there work somehow less valid?
How is OS X running exclusively on Apple hardware with an x86 chip any different than OS X running exclusively on Apple hardware with a PPC chip?
Unless Apple allows OS X to run on (and more importantly, be sold on and for) non-Apple hardware, they will be no more of a threat to Microsoft than they are now.
He can certainly witness that there's no money (or future) in selling an OS that attempts to compete with Windows (see also: anti-trust case, BeOS, etc).
Here's a nickel, kid. Buy yourself a sense of humor.
I agree that it's a brilliant idea, but the relevant question is, why will it succeed this time if it failed last time?
Because restaurant delivery services are already a proven business. I worked for a startup company exactly like this back in the early '90s until we were bought out by our competition, a larger company providing the same service on the other side of the country who was expanding into our area. There are numerous other companies doing this as well. The only difference with the one in this story is that they're taking orders on-line instead of over the phone (and, reading over other comments, they aren't the first to do this).
There's really nothing new about this.
Your example is absurd, as you know. My assumption about this person would be based on the subject matter itself, not on the fact that they have a tattooed forehead.
On the other hand, I would argue that Manwoman is neither a bigot nor a sociopath, but that's a bit outside the scope of the conversation.
Their feeling of uncomfortability is just as valid as your feeling of indignation, but you haven't given them the choice to not be uncomfortable (by not having a piercing/tatoo).
Both their feelings of discomfort and my feeling of indignation are due to their prejudices. My getting a tattoo or body piercing does not affect them in any real way. Their prejudice very well may very well directly affect me (by, for example, causing a potential employer not not hire me because he may lose the money he might otherwise get from said people).
"The only difference between tattooed people and non-tattooed people is that tattooed people are much cooler and can kick your ass"
It's not "body modification"
Tattoos and piercings are, by definition, "body modification". They modify the body, do they not?
Either you're a modern primative - and proud of it
Kindly define "modern primitive" for me then, and then tell me that that's somehow a better label.
EOE laws only matter when you can prove discrimination in court (which is almost never). And if you do sue and win, guess who is going to get skipped over when job promotions come.
So you advocate punishing people for standing up for their rights? Does this apply to racial minorities as well?
Frankly, I'm a little amazed that no one has called you on your utter bullshit yet.
Because 15-20% of piercings involve unforeseen complications (excessive bleeding, permanent deformation, infection and dental/gum/sense-of-taste damage with respect to tongue piercing),
Please provide a credible source for that percentage. I've seen you cite it twice but neither time have you offered a source for it. Further, I challenge you to find one case of "sense-of-taste damage" due to a tongue piercing.
not least due to the lack of proper medical training by the people who carry out this sort of cosmetic surgery.
I assume this applies to women with pierced ears as well? If you say it doesn't, please consider that most mainstream ear piercings are done by forcing a blunt object through the ear with a plastic (read: can't be sterilized) device similar to a hole punch that is then reused on everyone else that wanders into the store. Compare this to piercing the ear, or anything else, with a sterile, single-use needle by someone who's had far more training than the average jewelry store employee.
Please educate yourself before spouting off like this in the future. A couple good places to start are the rec.arts.bodyart FAQ and BME (NSFW).
I sure as hell wouldn't trust $sales_guy if (s?)he showed up with a face full of shrapnel.
Have you ever thought to ask yourself why that is?
The thing about tatoos and piercings is that they are usually visible
Not really, no. Consider that, in even business casual attire, far more of your body is covered up than not. I got my first tattoo in 1988 and have half a dozen or so now, including one large one on my back, but not until last year did I get one that's visible even when wearing a short sleeve shirt. The same is true for non-facial body piercings.
You got your tatoo or piercing knowing what the response would be so you really don't have a right to complain when you get that response.
I absolutely do have the right to complain about it. I think we can all agree that, ideally, people would not be discriminated against for making personal choices that affect no one else. So why shouldn't we complain if they do?
Not to mention that most of the links are to his Livejournal, not his own site. LJ gets many times the traffic that Slashdot does and handles it just fine.
If there's a list somewhere of things that prove yourself not a hacker in the slighest, "crying about a sound card not working then switching to a proprietary OS out of spite and laziness" is definitely on it.
Have you considered that some people don't care about "proving themselves a hacker" and just want a computer that's going to work consistently and reliably, without having to fuck around with every little thing when you could be getting stuff done?
If your computer is a hobby in itself, fine, but for many of us our computers are tool. A means to an end rather than the end itself.
I switched to OS X on my desktop two years ago and haven't looked back.