All countries basically signed the ICAO treaty, stating "A person shall not act as a flight crew member of an aircraft unless a valid licence is held". It does not state your 1200 feet rule (although air rules are often much more relaxed below 1200 feet).
I'm 42 playing Battlefield 4. It took me a while to get into it. I never played FPS when young but I am having fun now and ending up in the top 5 normally. But the fun part is the most important one.
And maybe spamfiltering should be forbidden at that level. Because the entry in that field for companies is very hard. You can't buy your own spamfiltering for Google, Hotmail or ISPx. And something else is at play too: ISPs don't give much for your email. They rather overblock than underblock. It is often seen as a cost only. 50% of ISPs do a poor job at filtering.
One example: I would like a DMARC test in my spamchecker. Good luck convincing your ISP if they don't have it.
But to come back to your argument: Filtering should only be done at the request of the user/buyer of service (and/or therefore necessary for the security of the ISP).
No, it would be different: NSA to Microsoft: Hand over the code and release this fix so we can backdoor account X. And the next update the account can be compromised. This update will only spread to updates for server Y which holds account X.
And if they are really good at understanding risks they know that overregulation increases the chance of people not accepting the policy (and ignoring it in total).
Although, if you keep a max ceiling of 120 meters, I'm not sure why the area around the airfield is chosen to be so large. No aircraft will fly that low unless he is in the pattern.
There is no 'best' way to spamfilter bad emails. The definition of spam is unknown and being redefined constantly by spamfilters (which is a little different from what recipients think spam is).
The problem is that the process of 'what is spam' is quite complex for humans. For instance: Suppose I gave you permission to send me bulkmail and you only start to use it two years later. Is that spam? For one person it isn't, for the other it is.
Because we don't have proper, easy to do and efficient while running, code reuse. The coding is this world is 'pre-industrialisation' era where the guilds are companies and noone has created simple stuff like an m10 bolt. No efficient standards.
No, DMARC authenticates you as a sender to fight phishing but does not tell you what the rest of the spamfilter concludes. You can still send spam using DMARC. The reporting feedback of DMARC is necessary to find problems in the authentication. An added bonus is that you can identify spammers.
Microsoft has SNDS which is pretty helpful in finding moments when things go bad. It does not identify your customers, I have to find that myself.
Slashdot Mirror
And not to forget the use of the Imperial System... They may only be using it because of the catchy name...
https://www.icao.int/Meetings/...
All countries basically signed the ICAO treaty, stating "A person shall not act as a flight crew member of an aircraft unless a valid licence is held". It does not state your 1200 feet rule (although air rules are often much more relaxed below 1200 feet).
You work at SAP?
In Russia, Beowulf cluster imagines you.
You may not trust them and see them at value. But not everyone is able to look at the impact of the usage / mis-use of that data.
I'm 42 playing Battlefield 4. It took me a while to get into it. I never played FPS when young but I am having fun now and ending up in the top 5 normally. But the fun part is the most important one.
Did it remove the windows partition with Linux?
++1
What is worse than 'corporate practices with closed-source software' is 'corporate practices with closed-source software AND a monopoly'.
No one liked IBM but I wanted OS/2 to succeed anyway.
And maybe spamfiltering should be forbidden at that level. Because the entry in that field for companies is very hard. You can't buy your own spamfiltering for Google, Hotmail or ISPx. And something else is at play too: ISPs don't give much for your email. They rather overblock than underblock. It is often seen as a cost only. 50% of ISPs do a poor job at filtering.
One example: I would like a DMARC test in my spamchecker. Good luck convincing your ISP if they don't have it.
But to come back to your argument: Filtering should only be done at the request of the user/buyer of service (and/or therefore necessary for the security of the ISP).
Maybe we should have a poll. Just some free market research for MS.
There is only one thing that changed: Apple has more interoperability. MS is still the same.
No, it would be different: NSA to Microsoft: Hand over the code and release this fix so we can backdoor account X. And the next update the account can be compromised. This update will only spread to updates for server Y which holds account X.
And if they are really good at understanding risks they know that overregulation increases the chance of people not accepting the policy (and ignoring it in total).
They are different in the fact that most missiles are not configurable platforms.
Although, if you keep a max ceiling of 120 meters, I'm not sure why the area around the airfield is chosen to be so large. No aircraft will fly that low unless he is in the pattern.
Then use Flarm ;-)
http://flarm.com/
If everyone has autonomous weapons, every insane person will have one.
The new 'onion'?
There is no 'best' way to spamfilter bad emails. The definition of spam is unknown and being redefined constantly by spamfilters (which is a little different from what recipients think spam is).
The problem is that the process of 'what is spam' is quite complex for humans. For instance: Suppose I gave you permission to send me bulkmail and you only start to use it two years later. Is that spam? For one person it isn't, for the other it is.
But I didn't know either...
Because we don't have proper, easy to do and efficient while running, code reuse. The coding is this world is 'pre-industrialisation' era where the guilds are companies and noone has created simple stuff like an m10 bolt. No efficient standards.
sed 's/you can identify spammers./you can identify spammers pretending to be you/'
No, DMARC authenticates you as a sender to fight phishing but does not tell you what the rest of the spamfilter concludes. You can still send spam using DMARC. The reporting feedback of DMARC is necessary to find problems in the authentication. An added bonus is that you can identify spammers.
Microsoft has SNDS which is pretty helpful in finding moments when things go bad. It does not identify your customers, I have to find that myself.