Shhh! The Bible literalists might see that, and realize that their whole idea system is broken. Besides, you only have to read the first chapter of Genesis to find an inconsistency. According to Genesis 1:3-5, the sun was created on the 1st day. But according to Genesis 1:14-19, it was created on the 4th day.
There are 10 types of people who read your comment: those who were expecting 7 more brand names, those who normally count in binary and thought you had 1 too many, and those who wonder why you'd write 10 base 3 as "ten".
Funny thing is, I know the difference, and didn't notice, because Wikipedia pulled up the right article, even with the typo, and the fact that it's more commonly known as the Anthropic Principle. (I also know what a run-on sentence is, apparently.)
If your use of the cell phone is affecting your sperm count, perhaps you're using it wrong.
Hmm, I wonder if it's actually using the cell phone that's the problem, or the fact that I carry the phone around in my pants pocket. I suppose I'm sending my little swimmers micro-doses of microwave radiation. Or perhaps it's that more use means more ringing, which causes more radiation while still in the pocket. Personally, I suspect that those heavy cell phone users already had low sperm counts.
I wonder if in addition to sperm count/"quality", if it increases genertic mutations within the sperm cells. That would seem to be a much bigger societal health concern.
Apache added support for RFC 2817 to mod_ssl about a year ago, in Apache HTTPD 2.2. Admittedly, not many people are using 2.2 yet; a lot of servers are still running 1.3.
I could not find any indication that Mozilla/Firefox support RFC 2817. (I read one email archive that said it did, but bugzilla says it has not been implemented.)
I found the answer to my question regarding IE7 support: it will not support RFC 2817. It will however, support RFC 3546 (SNI) in the Vista version, which is apparently a better method of getting the same functionality. (The reply to the above Slashdot comment includes some info and links on SNI.) Mozilla does not yet support SNI. Apache does not support SNI out of the box; the mod_gnutls module does, but it's not included with Apache, and is not yet production quality. There is a patch for Apache mod_ssl.
Summary: It appears that SNI will be the way forward, but consensus and implementations still need to catch up. IE7/Vista is the second browser implementation after Opera. Apache and Mozilla do not yet support it, but are working on it. Here's a decent write-up about the situation.
While we're at it, how about RFC 2817 support? It allows an HTTP/1.1 connection to be upgraded to a TLS (SSL/HTTPS) connection AFTER the initial connection. This would allow web servers to use a single IP address for secure virtual hosts, which cannot be done currently via HTTPS. (Because the certificate is required in the HTTPS handshake, before the Host: field is provided, so the server cannot choose which certificate to present based on the hostname requested.) Adding this feature to browsers would release a lot of pressure on the IP address space utilization.
I can't believe that didn't get modded up. I'm not big on bashing Microsoft, but realistically, this is the honest answer about Firefox's biggest shortcoming.
I like the kind of guy who will not only admit to the faults in his own code, but stand up and point them out when given the chance. To my mind, the only way to improve is to be honest with yourself about where you need improvement. Kudos!
The main [AllMusic] page [on the Byrds] looks nice, but the only discography is a small icon of six albums. Clicking on those takes me to a great page for each album, with very detailed information, but The Byrds had more than six albums! There also doesn't seem to be anything more than names listed for most songs. I'd like more detail, which is especially important when bands release multiple versions of the same song.
Methinks you've missed the tabs at the top. With labels like "Discography" and "Songs". The Discography tab on the Byrds lists 14 albums, and about 100 compilation albums that they appear on. Clicking on the Songs tab, and selecting the song "Eight Miles High" gives a page with a long review of the song, and about 40 albums it appears on, with lengths listed.
I think you've just missed all the data you're looking for on AllMusic. It all seems to be there, presented well, but perhaps a tad difficult to navigate.
Seeing as how Ann Landers has been dead for 4 years, I don't think that'd work to well. And according to Wikipedia (what else?) her column is no longer written either.
I think your analogies are good, but I don't think most people would consider any of them "theft" or "stealing". Stealing my wife would mean that I no longer have any access to her. If she ran off with you, some people might say you "stole" my wife, but I think that's more of a figure of speech than an actual definitive term.
I still think you missed the point. I never claimed that there were no rights being violated. Just that the nature of violating those rights is not synonymous with stealing, because you still have access to your own copies. As a corollary, making laws that treat the 2 things as the same will not be useful.
Stealing means taking something away from someone, so that the original owner no longer has the item. That's the difference between stealing property and "stealing" "intellectual property" -- the owner still has complete access to their "intellectual property", even if it's been "stolen".
Actually, there's some correlation between height and intelligence, as well as income. And there was a recent study in the UK that showed that one of the most significant predictors of whether women would find a man attractive when meeting in person was the man's height. (I can't find that study, but this paper found similar results in online dating data.)
Yeah, I think most people here are missing the biggest impact Reiser was trying to make in UNIX file systems: semantics. First, he was trying to make small files efficient, so that each file could hold a smaller amount of data, more like a single field within a database row. So instead of having to parse/etc/passwd, you would put each piece of info in a separate file -- for example/etc/user/booch/password would contain the hashed password, and/etc/user/booch/shell would contain the user's shell.
But most importantly, he was trying to create a sort of extended attributes system whereby every file contains "sub-files". There could be a subfile containing ACLs for the file, a subfile containing quota info, subfiles for permissions, etc. And in addition to being able to find a file based on its filename and path, you'd be able to look up a file based on other attributes, like how you can SELECT a row from a database using arbitrary keys. The idea is to leverage the past several decades of what we've learned about databases to use in managing files. Because a filesystem is really just a database of blobs, indexed by pathnames.
Yes, but if you blow up 500 people in an airport, people in their minds think "holy shit, they almost blew up a plane, and killed 2 plane's worth of people". If the terrorists' only intent was to kill Americans, they'd just invest in cigarette advertising.
I don't think the original post in this thread was arguing against that. Just that being ready to find the right person is also important, and more often overlooked.
Given the number of people who are actually happy, well-adjusted people, most people shouldn't get married.
That's probably true. And probably accounts for a large percentage of the current divorce rate. Is there some reason that people feel compelled to get married? Even in the face of evidence that they should not? I think that's where the blame should be placed, if you want to place blame external to the actual people involved. (Not that I'm generally a fan of that.)
It occurs to me that pre-marriage counseling is a good idea -- but probably too late, since the couple have already pretty much made up their minds. Pre-engagement counseling would probably be a better idea, and help people to determine whether to decide to get married. If I ever find myself in that situation [and yes, I've had several serious girlfriends], I may actually try that.
I think you missed his meaning. He meant that you need to be happy with yourself before you can be happy in a relationship. Not necessarily that you need to change to be the person that your spouse wants. Being happy with yourself allows you to spend the time to find the right person, instead of getting into a relationship for the wrong reasons, in order to fulfill something that's missing in yourself.
Re:Your career doesn't define your divorce.
on
IT and Divorce?
·
· Score: 2, Funny
As a divorced IT professional with full custody of the kids, I fully plan to switch to Linux-based relationship OS before considering any future long-term relationship.:P
I agree. An Open Marriage would be great. Granted, it's a lot different than a Closed Marriage, and many people will have some difficulty adapting.
Slashdot Mirror
Shhh! The Bible literalists might see that, and realize that their whole idea system is broken. Besides, you only have to read the first chapter of Genesis to find an inconsistency. According to Genesis 1:3-5, the sun was created on the 1st day. But according to Genesis 1:14-19, it was created on the 4th day.
Well stated. I can't believe someone didn't say that higher up in the thread.
Sysco is a Fortune 500 company. I would think that you could trust the quality of their products.
There are 10 types of people who read your comment: those who were expecting 7 more brand names, those who normally count in binary and thought you had 1 too many, and those who wonder why you'd write 10 base 3 as "ten".
Funny thing is, I know the difference, and didn't notice, because Wikipedia pulled up the right article, even with the typo, and the fact that it's more commonly known as the Anthropic Principle. (I also know what a run-on sentence is, apparently.)
I'm surprised that the Universe is as developed as it is, being this young.
Er, that sounds a lot like the Anthropomorphic Principal could explain that.
If your use of the cell phone is affecting your sperm count, perhaps you're using it wrong.
Hmm, I wonder if it's actually using the cell phone that's the problem, or the fact that I carry the phone around in my pants pocket. I suppose I'm sending my little swimmers micro-doses of microwave radiation. Or perhaps it's that more use means more ringing, which causes more radiation while still in the pocket. Personally, I suspect that those heavy cell phone users already had low sperm counts.
I wonder if in addition to sperm count/"quality", if it increases genertic mutations within the sperm cells. That would seem to be a much bigger societal health concern.
Apache added support for RFC 2817 to mod_ssl about a year ago, in Apache HTTPD 2.2. Admittedly, not many people are using 2.2 yet; a lot of servers are still running 1.3.
I could not find any indication that Mozilla/Firefox support RFC 2817. (I read one email archive that said it did, but bugzilla says it has not been implemented.)
I found the answer to my question regarding IE7 support: it will not support RFC 2817. It will however, support RFC 3546 (SNI) in the Vista version, which is apparently a better method of getting the same functionality. (The reply to the above Slashdot comment includes some info and links on SNI.) Mozilla does not yet support SNI. Apache does not support SNI out of the box; the mod_gnutls module does, but it's not included with Apache, and is not yet production quality. There is a patch for Apache mod_ssl.
Summary: It appears that SNI will be the way forward, but consensus and implementations still need to catch up. IE7/Vista is the second browser implementation after Opera. Apache and Mozilla do not yet support it, but are working on it. Here's a decent write-up about the situation.
While we're at it, how about RFC 2817 support? It allows an HTTP/1.1 connection to be upgraded to a TLS (SSL/HTTPS) connection AFTER the initial connection. This would allow web servers to use a single IP address for secure virtual hosts, which cannot be done currently via HTTPS. (Because the certificate is required in the HTTPS handshake, before the Host: field is provided, so the server cannot choose which certificate to present based on the hostname requested.) Adding this feature to browsers would release a lot of pressure on the IP address space utilization.
Easy. It's not bundled with Windows.
I can't believe that didn't get modded up. I'm not big on bashing Microsoft, but realistically, this is the honest answer about Firefox's biggest shortcoming.
Well, if you don't feel the need to conform to the standard, why should the browser bother to conform?
I like the kind of guy who will not only admit to the faults in his own code, but stand up and point them out when given the chance. To my mind, the only way to improve is to be honest with yourself about where you need improvement. Kudos!
To put it in UNIX terms, Mac's Spotlight is like the 'locate' command, whereas Windows Search is like the 'find' command.
The main [AllMusic] page [on the Byrds] looks nice, but the only discography is a small icon of six albums. Clicking on those takes me to a great page for each album, with very detailed information, but The Byrds had more than six albums! There also doesn't seem to be anything more than names listed for most songs. I'd like more detail, which is especially important when bands release multiple versions of the same song.
Methinks you've missed the tabs at the top. With labels like "Discography" and "Songs". The Discography tab on the Byrds lists 14 albums, and about 100 compilation albums that they appear on. Clicking on the Songs tab, and selecting the song "Eight Miles High" gives a page with a long review of the song, and about 40 albums it appears on, with lengths listed.
I think you've just missed all the data you're looking for on AllMusic. It all seems to be there, presented well, but perhaps a tad difficult to navigate.
Seeing as how Ann Landers has been dead for 4 years, I don't think that'd work to well. And according to Wikipedia (what else?) her column is no longer written either.
For searches like that, I'd probably go to AllMusic.com first.
I think your analogies are good, but I don't think most people would consider any of them "theft" or "stealing". Stealing my wife would mean that I no longer have any access to her. If she ran off with you, some people might say you "stole" my wife, but I think that's more of a figure of speech than an actual definitive term.
I still think you missed the point. I never claimed that there were no rights being violated. Just that the nature of violating those rights is not synonymous with stealing, because you still have access to your own copies. As a corollary, making laws that treat the 2 things as the same will not be useful.
Stealing means taking something away from someone, so that the original owner no longer has the item. That's the difference between stealing property and "stealing" "intellectual property" -- the owner still has complete access to their "intellectual property", even if it's been "stolen".
Actually, there's some correlation between height and intelligence, as well as income. And there was a recent study in the UK that showed that one of the most significant predictors of whether women would find a man attractive when meeting in person was the man's height. (I can't find that study, but this paper found similar results in online dating data.)
Yeah, I think most people here are missing the biggest impact Reiser was trying to make in UNIX file systems: semantics. First, he was trying to make small files efficient, so that each file could hold a smaller amount of data, more like a single field within a database row. So instead of having to parse /etc/passwd, you would put each piece of info in a separate file -- for example /etc/user/booch/password would contain the hashed password, and /etc/user/booch/shell would contain the user's shell.
But most importantly, he was trying to create a sort of extended attributes system whereby every file contains "sub-files". There could be a subfile containing ACLs for the file, a subfile containing quota info, subfiles for permissions, etc. And in addition to being able to find a file based on its filename and path, you'd be able to look up a file based on other attributes, like how you can SELECT a row from a database using arbitrary keys. The idea is to leverage the past several decades of what we've learned about databases to use in managing files. Because a filesystem is really just a database of blobs, indexed by pathnames.
Yes, but if you blow up 500 people in an airport, people in their minds think "holy shit, they almost blew up a plane, and killed 2 plane's worth of people". If the terrorists' only intent was to kill Americans, they'd just invest in cigarette advertising.
I still assert you have to find the right person.
I don't think the original post in this thread was arguing against that. Just that being ready to find the right person is also important, and more often overlooked.
Given the number of people who are actually happy, well-adjusted people, most people shouldn't get married.
That's probably true. And probably accounts for a large percentage of the current divorce rate. Is there some reason that people feel compelled to get married? Even in the face of evidence that they should not? I think that's where the blame should be placed, if you want to place blame external to the actual people involved. (Not that I'm generally a fan of that.)
It occurs to me that pre-marriage counseling is a good idea -- but probably too late, since the couple have already pretty much made up their minds. Pre-engagement counseling would probably be a better idea, and help people to determine whether to decide to get married. If I ever find myself in that situation [and yes, I've had several serious girlfriends], I may actually try that.
Good discussion.
I think you missed his meaning. He meant that you need to be happy with yourself before you can be happy in a relationship. Not necessarily that you need to change to be the person that your spouse wants. Being happy with yourself allows you to spend the time to find the right person, instead of getting into a relationship for the wrong reasons, in order to fulfill something that's missing in yourself.
As a divorced IT professional with full custody of the kids, I fully plan to switch to Linux-based relationship OS before considering any future long-term relationship. :P
I agree. An Open Marriage would be great. Granted, it's a lot different than a Closed Marriage, and many people will have some difficulty adapting.
It's how you deal with your job.