Ya know, I never heard anything like that in Tae Kwon Do, so I would never have thought of using them in that context.
Still, getting spam IS rather like getting kicked in the nads...
As for buzzwords like that, those are from my "forbidden words list" I made up while working at a web design firm a few years back. It was truly frightening how many times a day you'd hear every one of those at work. I distributed the list to the developers, and it was all we could do to keep from laughing out loud every time one of the sales people or owners would use a word on the list.
Hmmm. I smell profit! I love the smell of profit in the morning.
And one could just eliminate step 3, and set the mail server to auto-delete any email to those addresses, but not bounce, and just keep on going back to step 2.
Ya know, I _do_ have a few unused domains laying around...
"100% guaranteed real e-mail addresses, guaranteed no bounces! (or your blood money back)"
It's a whole new marketing paradigm! Just think of the synergy, man, the _synergy_! I believe a quick ROI is possible here by leveraging some core competencies and targeting the "low-hanging fruit" in this vertical.
I'm _so_ glad I have my own domain, and can create and destroy email addresses willy-nilly. I haven't seen a piece of spam in about a year, now, and that's with_out_ any spam filtering methods at all.
Until they have the full Tron experience with light cycles, tanks, and recognizers, all playing in the same 3D environment simultaneously, I'm going to continue to be underwhelmed compared to the movie. *shrug*
And I want a bit of my very own! (*YES**YES**YES*)
> Not quite, at least for me. Mozilla didn't make itself the default browser, but it did change my default from Firebird to IE, which I didn't appreciate.
Wow, bizarre! Seems the Windows installer folks have a fair amount of work ahead of them.
Other than that, I've been using it a few hours now, and it's working fine once you get the beast installed correctly. Gotta love them tabs!
If it's just a matter of deleting files & directories during install, then, yes, the installer COULD do that, and quite easily, rather than making someone go hunting them down. That's pretty ridiculous. You shouldn't HAVE to go hunting down stuff like that!
And I _am_ just saying that should be an option during install, not a default (though it should make the option prominent). re: multi-user systems
The vast majority of people are certainly not on multi-user systems, so making the installer default to behaviour you would expect on such a system is pretty dumb, IMO.
But then, what do I know? I'm just a usability/UI expert.:)
Sweet - I don't know how I missed that, but okay, you're definitely right!
That's a cool feature, now that I think about it. Now I can specify no fucking serif fonts EVER. *ahhhhh* 'Trebuchet MS' goodness wherever I browse. Schweet.
Okay, so my only gripe about it is the crappy handling of old Moz profile data left lying around, which is hardly a big deal to me. Yayness and goodness.
Nope, still font weirdness, though it is different now. There are a mix of serif and sans-serif fonts in each listing, though the columns are still mislabeled, and I have to have it select 'serif' fonts to get the 'sans serif' font I want.
The button label weirdness is, however, gone. Yay! Thanks for the advice. I'm temping on a piece of crap laptop and it had some old profiles laying around (though not Moz itself). Whew, stinky.
So, it's still got problems, and the installation of Moz is still pretty ridiculous if things like this can occur. What's it gonna take to get this stuff fixed? These problems have been around since the beginning of the project! Unbelievable. No wonder MS thinks they can get away with not updating IE anymore. *shaking head*
Within 1 minute, I found that it's listing sans-serif fonts as serif, and serif fonts as sans-serif. Yikes.
Also some weirdness in the toolbar buttons with vertical alignment. (Back & Forward buttons 'valigned' to the top, whilst Reload & Stop buttons are on the bottom). Bizarro.
At least this is the FIRST time a Mozilla release has actually NOT decided to make itself the default browser in spite of my always telling it not to. One bug fixed, yay!:)
I don't consider buses to be mass transit. They're just large cars, ya know?
And having 'bus service' doesn't imply having 'adequate' bus service, which, as I mentioned applies to the Kansas City (Missouri) area, and almost certainly others as well.
> Right, they do. But these people already have mass transit.
Wrong, many of us do not. I live in Seattle, home of the perpetual traffic-jam. I used to live in Kansas City. If you live in a suburb in Kansas City, not only do you not have any mass transit, you don't even get remotely convenient access to bus service (or any at all!). I'm sure the two cities I've lived in are not the only exceptions.
When I take the bus to work here in Seattle, I only have to make one change to another line, and STILL it takes me at _best_ twice as long to get to work as it does when I take my car. Sometimes a fair amount more.
And just because you're taking a bus, don't think you're helping control pollution, because if it's an old diesel bus, it could be putting out more pollution than a full passenger load would be if they were each driving a modern SUV. Seriously, that's how bad some of those old diesel buses are.
Maybe so, but until the law is changed, it IS the law.
The trick is to change the music industry's business model to allow this kind of thing, but to make sure it's not so easy to just out and out STEAL music (online or any other way). The only way I can think of to do that is with DRM. But then you get into very onerous restrictions that the industry wants to put into the DRM. It's going to be interesting seeing how this all balances out in the end, assuming it does.
I think Apple's music store is a step in the right direction, especially since they're now courting the indie labels. They need to up the encoding rate substantially, though, for the prices they're charging (IMO). Or maybe charge a lower rate for the current encoding quality, and their current rate for a higher encoding quality. I don't think $.99 per song is a bad rate if you're buying just what you want. And buying an album at a pop gets you an even lower rate. The quality just _really_ needs to be bumped up though. I don't have a problem with the format, just the price for the current encoding rate.
"Everybody does it" isn't a legal defense, though. Illegal is illegal is illegal. It doesn't _matter_ if everybody else is doing it. It doesn't _matter_ if you can get away doing it anonymously. It doesn't _matter_ that music is crap, that the industry charges too much for their product, etc, etc. Illegal is illegal. Period. Change the laws & the business model or stop bitching about it when the RIAA goes after your ass.
> This would kill p2p networks; I say this because they are going after only the people that shares. But not after the people that download. Well if no one shares then there will be nothing to download.
Uh, there would be nothing _ILLEGAL_ to download. There is plenty of material that would still be legal to transfer over P2P networks.
If you want to change the situation, you'll have to convince industry that it's in the wrong. Until then, it's still illegal. "Fair Use" hardly extends to letting hundreds of thousands (millions?) of people on the Internet that you don't know download copyrighted material from your machine.
Slashdot Mirror
I asked the same question of them recently, and was sent this in reply:
http://www.speakeasy.net/pricing
Ya know, I never heard anything like that in Tae Kwon Do, so I would never have thought of using them in that context.
Still, getting spam IS rather like getting kicked in the nads...
As for buzzwords like that, those are from my "forbidden words list" I made up while working at a web design firm a few years back. It was truly frightening how many times a day you'd hear every one of those at work. I distributed the list to the developers, and it was all we could do to keep from laughing out loud every time one of the sales people or owners would use a word on the list.
Hmmm. I smell profit! I love the smell of profit in the morning.
And one could just eliminate step 3, and set the mail server to auto-delete any email to those addresses, but not bounce, and just keep on going back to step 2.
Ya know, I _do_ have a few unused domains laying around...
"100% guaranteed real e-mail addresses, guaranteed no bounces! (or your blood money back)"
It's a whole new marketing paradigm! Just think of the synergy, man, the _synergy_! I believe a quick ROI is possible here by leveraging some core competencies and targeting the "low-hanging fruit" in this vertical.
Oh yes.
"People choose privacy over web firms"
I'm _so_ glad I have my own domain, and can create and destroy email addresses willy-nilly. I haven't seen a piece of spam in about a year, now, and that's with_out_ any spam filtering methods at all.
Until they have the full Tron experience with light cycles, tanks, and recognizers, all playing in the same 3D environment simultaneously, I'm going to continue to be underwhelmed compared to the movie. *shrug*
And I want a bit of my very own! (*YES**YES**YES*)
> Not quite, at least for me. Mozilla didn't make itself the default browser, but it did change my default from Firebird to IE, which I didn't appreciate.
Wow, bizarre! Seems the Windows installer folks have a fair amount of work ahead of them.
Other than that, I've been using it a few hours now, and it's working fine once you get the beast installed correctly. Gotta love them tabs!
If it's just a matter of deleting files & directories during install, then, yes, the installer COULD do that, and quite easily, rather than making someone go hunting them down. That's pretty ridiculous. You shouldn't HAVE to go hunting down stuff like that!
:)
And I _am_ just saying that should be an option during install, not a default (though it should make the option prominent). re: multi-user systems
The vast majority of people are certainly not on multi-user systems, so making the installer default to behaviour you would expect on such a system is pretty dumb, IMO.
But then, what do I know? I'm just a usability/UI expert.
Sweet - I don't know how I missed that, but okay, you're definitely right!
That's a cool feature, now that I think about it. Now I can specify no fucking serif fonts EVER. *ahhhhh* 'Trebuchet MS' goodness wherever I browse. Schweet.
Okay, so my only gripe about it is the crappy handling of old Moz profile data left lying around, which is hardly a big deal to me. Yayness and goodness.
danka for de 411
Nope, still font weirdness, though it is different now. There are a mix of serif and sans-serif fonts in each listing, though the columns are still mislabeled, and I have to have it select 'serif' fonts to get the 'sans serif' font I want.
The button label weirdness is, however, gone. Yay! Thanks for the advice. I'm temping on a piece of crap laptop and it had some old profiles laying around (though not Moz itself). Whew, stinky.
So, it's still got problems, and the installation of Moz is still pretty ridiculous if things like this can occur. What's it gonna take to get this stuff fixed? These problems have been around since the beginning of the project! Unbelievable. No wonder MS thinks they can get away with not updating IE anymore. *shaking head*
Too bad, so sad. Moz 1.4 is fulla da bugs.
:)
Within 1 minute, I found that it's listing sans-serif fonts as serif, and serif fonts as sans-serif. Yikes.
Also some weirdness in the toolbar buttons with vertical alignment. (Back & Forward buttons 'valigned' to the top, whilst Reload & Stop buttons are on the bottom). Bizarro.
At least this is the FIRST time a Mozilla release has actually NOT decided to make itself the default browser in spite of my always telling it not to. One bug fixed, yay!
"But first, you must fight the Bear!"
I don't consider buses to be mass transit. They're just large cars, ya know?
And having 'bus service' doesn't imply having 'adequate' bus service, which, as I mentioned applies to the Kansas City (Missouri) area, and almost certainly others as well.
> is the day the US economy goes through the toilet
Been there, still doing that. Where you been, boy?
> Right, they do. But these people already have mass transit.
Wrong, many of us do not. I live in Seattle, home of the perpetual traffic-jam. I used to live in Kansas City. If you live in a suburb in Kansas City, not only do you not have any mass transit, you don't even get remotely convenient access to bus service (or any at all!). I'm sure the two cities I've lived in are not the only exceptions.
When I take the bus to work here in Seattle, I only have to make one change to another line, and STILL it takes me at _best_ twice as long to get to work as it does when I take my car. Sometimes a fair amount more.
And just because you're taking a bus, don't think you're helping control pollution, because if it's an old diesel bus, it could be putting out more pollution than a full passenger load would be if they were each driving a modern SUV. Seriously, that's how bad some of those old diesel buses are.
I wonder if any of those evaluations concluded that someone would 'violate' someone who invaded their privacy. I know mine would. :)
Check _this_ privacy policy!
If you're haptic and you know it, clap your hands!
Maybe so, but until the law is changed, it IS the law.
The trick is to change the music industry's business model to allow this kind of thing, but to make sure it's not so easy to just out and out STEAL music (online or any other way). The only way I can think of to do that is with DRM. But then you get into very onerous restrictions that the industry wants to put into the DRM. It's going to be interesting seeing how this all balances out in the end, assuming it does.
I think Apple's music store is a step in the right direction, especially since they're now courting the indie labels. They need to up the encoding rate substantially, though, for the prices they're charging (IMO). Or maybe charge a lower rate for the current encoding quality, and their current rate for a higher encoding quality. I don't think $.99 per song is a bad rate if you're buying just what you want. And buying an album at a pop gets you an even lower rate. The quality just _really_ needs to be bumped up though. I don't have a problem with the format, just the price for the current encoding rate.
"Everybody does it" isn't a legal defense, though. Illegal is illegal is illegal. It doesn't _matter_ if everybody else is doing it. It doesn't _matter_ if you can get away doing it anonymously. It doesn't _matter_ that music is crap, that the industry charges too much for their product, etc, etc. Illegal is illegal. Period. Change the laws & the business model or stop bitching about it when the RIAA goes after your ass.
> This would kill p2p networks; I say this because they are going after only the people that shares. But not after the people that download. Well if no one shares then there will be nothing to download.
Uh, there would be nothing _ILLEGAL_ to download. There is plenty of material that would still be legal to transfer over P2P networks.
If you want to change the situation, you'll have to convince industry that it's in the wrong. Until then, it's still illegal. "Fair Use" hardly extends to letting hundreds of thousands (millions?) of people on the Internet that you don't know download copyrighted material from your machine.
*Jobs suddenly looks around*
"I knew it! I'm surrounded by *os**iaks!!!"
> Vote, you fools!
Are you _sure_ those are the people you want voting?
Now, see, this is why we need a 'Funny' for meta-moderation!
"No, I should be moderated an Ogre!"
:)
Hey, with this topic, shouldn't anyone who's moderated 'Troll' be on topic?
Free the Trolls! You have nothing to lose but your license!
"I'm not a Troll; I'm an _Ogre_!"
- Shrek
You're lucky you're far enough away from the black hole that is Rolla, Missouri.