When I pilot sees something weird with the instruments and blames it on a cell phone or PDA or something, that's really anecdotal. What I'd like to see is an interview with a cargo pilot. I mean, do pilots flying MD-11s for Fed Ex see these same little glitches? If so, I think it's safe to say it's not the passengers electronics causing the problems.
I agree with you but I'd like to play devil's advocate if I may.
Rewards are based only on the quality of the work, and not on the quality of previous work or previous money.
One of the reasons we work so hard is the instinctive desire to provide for our children. I don't think it'd be good to take that capability away from society. I think it's a good thing that I can plan for my childrens' welfare and be confident that either I'll be there to take care of them, or they'll have enough insurance money to live a comfortable life.
I see your point about artistry - but please consider mine as an argument against a more general form.
I feel sorry for the engineers who's work has been damaged, but I can't help but want to photoshop this. There is a desk complete with in-out boxes just to the left of the satellite. I think there needs to be a small pool of blood there to make this funny.
Bad news: we dropped a multi-million dollar satellite Worse news: it landed on Phil, the only guy who knows how to fix it.
I guess I could download this one because I probably do have unzip installed, but I can't remember ever using it. Wake me when there's a vulnerability in gzip.
What's the point to all of this? Redhat doesn't need a "service pack" because most of the security vulnerabilities do not affect the majority of their users. You can't compare Redhat's patch list to XPs. If you want to make it fair, compare Redhat to the sum of XP, Office, IIS, SQL Server, and whatever else. I think you'll find that XP has a lot more critical issues all by itself and when you add the application software you'll see why the idea of a service pack makes sense in the MS world but not in the Linux world.
See, that's called rhetoric. You haven't yet made an argument and you haven't responded to my challenge that you reinforce the ascertain you made that the US and Iranian governments are equally oppressive.
So, if anyone is keeping score that's zero points for you so far. Care to try again?
Ok I'll bite. Please tell me that you understand the difference between being spied on (US) and being shot in the head for speaking out (Iran). Please tell me that you understand the difference between a bad law (US) that we can repeal just by getting enough people informed and an oppressive regime (Iran) that can jail you or kill you on a whim and there's not a damn thing you can do.
10 seconds of google revealed this: http://www.psy.vanderbilt.edu/staff/jody/co pyroomp rinter.html#Win2k
Steps to install a network printer under XP:
Go to your printer control panel
Double-click the "Add Printer" icon
Select "local" rather than "network"
Click on the "Add Port" button
Select tcp/ip as the type
Type in the ip address 129.59.231.119 and click the "Next" button
Click on "Finish"
Select the "HP Laserjet 1200 series" printer
Click "Next" or "Finish" through the remaining steps
Steps to install network printer under 98:
Choose "Specify the network printer by address" and then click Next.
Select "IP address" and type "129.59.231.119" into the space provided, and click Next
Choose "Configure network settings for me".
Choose "Install a driver from a printer installation disk or driver file". Browse to where the.inf file is located (most likely "c:\lj1200n").
Type a name for the Printer and click "Next".
When presented with a summary click "Install".
Click "Finish".
Those instructions are nothing alike. I stand by my assertion that the UI has changed sufficiently between 98 and XP to make it confusing for users.
Alter network settings: Control pannel, Networking, Right click, Properties, Click on TCP/IP, adjust values.
right click the network neighborhood icon in 98 and select properties and you go right to the dialog box you mention. Right click it in XP and you get the "Network Connections" box. Select local area connection and then you get the dialog. There's an extra step in XP. So again, I stand by the assertion that 98 and XP are different.
You and I might not be confused by these differences, but average Joe is. Let's not lose track of the point of the article. It said that people do not adopt Linux because the UIs of the window managers are different. My point is that this is also true of Windows and so the article is kind of irrelavent.
Where is the major difference here? That's right; there's none.
I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Try explaining to someone over the phone how to install a printer or alter network settings. The dialog boxes and even the places you go to bring up those dialog boxes are very different between 98, ME, and XP.
I've said this before and I'll say it again. It's time for we the people who have had our reputations tarnished by SCO's actions to take them to court. It takes years to build a resume of Linux qualifications, experience, certifications, etc. And it's damn hard enough to find a job in this economy.
SCO's executives come along with what can only be described as a scheme to enrich themselves by inflating stock, and they run our reputations into the mud. As a result of SCO's executives' actions it is now more difficult for me to get a job.
I believe that a case can be made that the executives of SCO knew from the outset that their allegations didn't hold water. I believe that a case can be made that their actions were motivated by personal greed - the evidence for this is the pattern of press releases correlating with dips in stock prices and the sale of stock by those executives.
As a result, I believe that the SCO executives should be held personally responsible in a court a law. They made decisions that have cost me potential income, and I think they should be the made to defend those decisions in a class action suit.
I don't see anything in his account of the problem that indicates the spam was sent from his domain - only that his domain was listed as a return address. So, I don't think SPF would have helped him, even though it is good advice.
If the GPG secret key is on a Windoze user's hard drive, then what stops the virus from waiting in the background, sniffing the passphrase, then invoking GPG itself?
nothing. But then you know who has the virus. Remember, Sobig was spoofing email addresses of people you knew. No virus will be able to sign a spoofed email, so once you get one signed virus message from a person you refuse thier key afterwards. Make them create another key and have it signed by someone you know before you'll talk to them. That'll teach em to get viruses.
a: those 13.1 million shares that you can buy on the exchange most likely don't add up to 51% of the company. Other companies like the canopy group hold shares that aren't for sale. b: even if every slashdotter bought shares I'm not sure they could be consolodated into a single controlling interest. c: the process of buying those shares would greating inflate the stock price. At it's peak, the executives would sell thier shares and be richer than god. At that point, they'd probably be happy to let us have the worthless shell of SCO and go retire someplace nice. Then when we used our newfound influence to drop the lawsuit, the world would realize that SCO has nothing of value and the stock price would fall - and we'd loose our money. d: the people who own shares and are not involved in our little scheme would sue us - and win - for loosing the value of thier stock.
Cheating in an online game is immoral IMHO, but in a single player game I actually *demand* the ability to cheat. See, I view computer games as just an extension of my imagination. And I don't like arbitrary walls holding me in. There's no joy for me in "defeating" a single player game. The fun is in the play itself, and if the designers - being only human after all - limited me in some way, I want a way around that limitation. I want a cheat.
Case in point. X-COM UFO Defense. A great game and one that I still play because I can cheat at it. There is a program called xcomutil. I use it to add or replace the aliens and generally make the story progress the way I want it to. To me, that makes it fun, even though strictly speaking I am cheating.
I also play a lot of Quake and I've seen what cheaters do to an online game. So, my hope is that game makers, in their zeal to protect the online experience, will leave plenty of loopholes for cheats in single player games.
borrow subject lines from your host's mail spool (optionally, do so with only a small probability -- let evolution determine which subject lines are the most effective).
Can you elaborate on that? Are you talking about some master list of effective subjects?
That story is either a: not true b: not all there - ie, there's more to it than you think, like the person being an ass.
because if that really is the full extent of it - if all that happened was that a person refused to be searched and was arrested, the ACLU would be on it like flies on shit, and it'd probably be posted here on slashdot or over on fark.
You will not be arrested for refusing a search. I'm not a lawyer but I feel absolutely confident in saying that. The worst thing that could possibly happen would be that the store's managemment would ask you not to return.
If you are arrested, please buy me a plasma TV with the huge settlement you get after suing them. ok?
why doesn't SCO ask a judge to issue an injunction against kernel.org/mirrors to stop them from distributing it.
If they did this, however, they would have to show a *minimal* amount of compelling evidence.
That's the great thing about their tactic. They can say whatever they want to the press and it will be printed and mulled over by the clueless masses. But, if they want to go before a judge they have to have their ducks in a row. If they showed a judge the same code they showed in those PPT slides, they'd probably be held in contempt.
At what point can we sue SCO for damaging our livelihood by spewing FUD about Linux? It's hard enough to get a job without having to worry that some employer is going to think "whoa, I better not hire him, he might surreptitiously set up a Linux box somewhere and get us all sued."
And now that I think about it, why can't we sue the SCO executives personally - not just SCO itself. I know that being a corporation normally shields the execs from such lawsuits, but in this case it seems clear that the execs are driving the company into the ground for only one purpose, to enrich themselves. They are driving the company into the ground and they are dragging our reputation down with it. It a dump truck driver takes a shortcut through your yard, you can take the driver to court. Right? So, maybe the same logic would apply to SCO. The executives are driving the company and making reckless decisions with depraved indifference. I think they should be sued.
He's not talking about someone checking your bag when you go into a store. He's talking about someone who checks your bag when you leave - to make sure you haven't stolen anything.
Personally, I tell them to piss off. If they think I'm a thief they can call the cops. I'll wait. And while I wait, I'd like to borrow a telephone directory so that I can look up the number for a lawyer because I'm pretty sure I'm going to sue them.
I've done this twice and both times they let me go.
This site has a point by point comparison of plasma and LCD. If I understand correctly all digital televisions, be they CRT, LCD or plasma can display HDTV. However, if the screen does not have the same number of pixels or the same aspect ratio of HDTV then the picture will be adjusted. FWIW I don't think I'd pay much extra for a very few extra pixels. If the best value was non-HDTV that's what I'd get. It will still display HDTV programs if I understand correctly.
It almost seems like anything associated with men eventually comes under some form of attack. Yes, I know there are plenty of female gamers out there, but by and large gaming is a guy thing - and I can't help but wonder if this is a motivating factor in the drive to restrict games.
The activities that society values are usually not activities that guys instinctively enjoy. Society wants us to be nice, submissive, drones - to earn our paycheck and keep quiet. But we want to be hunters and warriors. Sometimes I wonder if someone is offended by that desire.
Slashdot Mirror
When I pilot sees something weird with the instruments and blames it on a cell phone or PDA or something, that's really anecdotal. What I'd like to see is an interview with a cargo pilot. I mean, do pilots flying MD-11s for Fed Ex see these same little glitches? If so, I think it's safe to say it's not the passengers electronics causing the problems.
See, why does everything always have to be about U?
huh?
Stupid geeks!
I agree with you but I'd like to play devil's advocate if I may.
Rewards are based only on the quality of the work, and not on the quality of previous work or previous money.
One of the reasons we work so hard is the instinctive desire to provide for our children. I don't think it'd be good to take that capability away from society. I think it's a good thing that I can plan for my childrens' welfare and be confident that either I'll be there to take care of them, or they'll have enough insurance money to live a comfortable life.
I see your point about artistry - but please consider mine as an argument against a more general form.
I feel sorry for the engineers who's work has been damaged, but I can't help but want to photoshop this. There is a desk complete with in-out boxes just to the left of the satellite. I think there needs to be a small pool of blood there to make this funny.
Bad news: we dropped a multi-million dollar satellite
Worse news: it landed on Phil, the only guy who knows how to fix it.
bzzz... nice try.
You need to provide a source for this statement:
his brother, a governor, "loses" thousands of votes
Please provide a source that shows that Gov. Bush "lost" or otherwise destroyed votes.
Good luck.
I hear this one a lot. There are X patches for such and such distribution. Let's take a look at a few of those patches shall we:
1. New up2date available with updated SSL certificate authority file
I have never used SSL. I've used Apache but I've never needed SSL. This patch does not apply to me.
2. Updated Sendmail packages fix vulnerability.
I've never set up a mail server. This patch does not apply to me.
3. Updated pam_smb packages fix remote buffer overflow.
I do use samba, so I guess I'll download this one.
4. GDM allows local user to read any file.
I've used XDM but generally I prefer to boot to a console. This patch does not apply to me.
5. Updated unzip packages fix trojan vulnerability
I guess I could download this one because I probably do have unzip installed, but I can't remember ever using it. Wake me when there's a vulnerability in gzip.
6. Updated Evolution packages fix multiple vulnerabilities
Call me crazy, but I use Mozilla's email client.
What's the point to all of this? Redhat doesn't need a "service pack" because most of the security vulnerabilities do not affect the majority of their users. You can't compare Redhat's patch list to XPs. If you want to make it fair, compare Redhat to the sum of XP, Office, IIS, SQL Server, and whatever else. I think you'll find that XP has a lot more critical issues all by itself and when you add the application software you'll see why the idea of a service pack makes sense in the MS world but not in the Linux world.
Guantanamo Bay.
See, that's called rhetoric. You haven't yet made an argument and you haven't responded to my challenge that you reinforce the ascertain you made that the US and Iranian governments are equally oppressive.
So, if anyone is keeping score that's zero points for you so far. Care to try again?
fear of being spied by U.S. goverment.
Ok I'll bite. Please tell me that you understand the difference between being spied on (US) and being shot in the head for speaking out (Iran). Please tell me that you understand the difference between a bad law (US) that we can repeal just by getting enough people informed and an oppressive regime (Iran) that can jail you or kill you on a whim and there's not a damn thing you can do.
Install printer: Connect printer, wait, print.
o pyroomp rinter.html#Win2k
.inf file is located (most likely "c:\lj1200n").
10 seconds of google revealed this:
http://www.psy.vanderbilt.edu/staff/jody/c
Steps to install a network printer under XP:
Go to your printer control panel
Double-click the "Add Printer" icon
Select "local" rather than "network"
Click on the "Add Port" button
Select tcp/ip as the type
Type in the ip address 129.59.231.119 and click the "Next" button
Click on "Finish"
Select the "HP Laserjet 1200 series" printer
Click "Next" or "Finish" through the remaining steps
Steps to install network printer under 98:
Choose "Specify the network printer by address" and then click Next.
Select "IP address" and type "129.59.231.119" into the space provided, and click Next
Choose "Configure network settings for me".
Choose "Install a driver from a printer installation disk or driver file". Browse to where the
Type a name for the Printer and click "Next".
When presented with a summary click "Install".
Click "Finish".
Those instructions are nothing alike. I stand by my assertion that the UI has changed sufficiently between 98 and XP to make it confusing for users.
Alter network settings: Control pannel, Networking, Right click, Properties, Click on TCP/IP, adjust values.
right click the network neighborhood icon in 98 and select properties and you go right to the dialog box you mention. Right click it in XP and you get the "Network Connections" box. Select local area connection and then you get the dialog. There's an extra step in XP. So again, I stand by the assertion that 98 and XP are different.
You and I might not be confused by these differences, but average Joe is. Let's not lose track of the point of the article. It said that people do not adopt Linux because the UIs of the window managers are different. My point is that this is also true of Windows and so the article is kind of irrelavent.
Where is the major difference here? That's right; there's none.
I'm sorry but I have to disagree. Try explaining to someone over the phone how to install a printer or alter network settings. The dialog boxes and even the places you go to bring up those dialog boxes are very different between 98, ME, and XP.
Too bad I have no mod points for you. That was very eloquently said and applicable to a lot of things outside the SCO/linux debate
I've said this before and I'll say it again. It's time for we the people who have had our reputations tarnished by SCO's actions to take them to court. It takes years to build a resume of Linux qualifications, experience, certifications, etc. And it's damn hard enough to find a job in this economy.
SCO's executives come along with what can only be described as a scheme to enrich themselves by inflating stock, and they run our reputations into the mud. As a result of SCO's executives' actions it is now more difficult for me to get a job.
I believe that a case can be made that the executives of SCO knew from the outset that their allegations didn't hold water. I believe that a case can be made that their actions were motivated by personal greed - the evidence for this is the pattern of press releases correlating with dips in stock prices and the sale of stock by those executives.
As a result, I believe that the SCO executives should be held personally responsible in a court a law. They made decisions that have cost me potential income, and I think they should be the made to defend those decisions in a class action suit.
I don't see anything in his account of the problem that indicates the spam was sent from his domain - only that his domain was listed as a return address. So, I don't think SPF would have helped him, even though it is good advice.
If the GPG secret key is on a Windoze user's hard drive, then what stops the virus from waiting in the background, sniffing the passphrase, then invoking GPG itself?
nothing. But then you know who has the virus. Remember, Sobig was spoofing email addresses of people you knew. No virus will be able to sign a spoofed email, so once you get one signed virus message from a person you refuse thier key afterwards. Make them create another key and have it signed by someone you know before you'll talk to them. That'll teach em to get viruses.
a: those 13.1 million shares that you can buy on the exchange most likely don't add up to 51% of the company. Other companies like the canopy group hold shares that aren't for sale.
b: even if every slashdotter bought shares I'm not sure they could be consolodated into a single controlling interest.
c: the process of buying those shares would greating inflate the stock price. At it's peak, the executives would sell thier shares and be richer than god. At that point, they'd probably be happy to let us have the worthless shell of SCO and go retire someplace nice. Then when we used our newfound influence to drop the lawsuit, the world would realize that SCO has nothing of value and the stock price would fall - and we'd loose our money.
d: the people who own shares and are not involved in our little scheme would sue us - and win - for loosing the value of thier stock.
Cheating in an online game is immoral IMHO, but in a single player game I actually *demand* the ability to cheat. See, I view computer games as just an extension of my imagination. And I don't like arbitrary walls holding me in. There's no joy for me in "defeating" a single player game. The fun is in the play itself, and if the designers - being only human after all - limited me in some way, I want a way around that limitation. I want a cheat.
Case in point. X-COM UFO Defense. A great game and one that I still play because I can cheat at it. There is a program called xcomutil. I use it to add or replace the aliens and generally make the story progress the way I want it to. To me, that makes it fun, even though strictly speaking I am cheating.
I also play a lot of Quake and I've seen what cheaters do to an online game. So, my hope is that game makers, in their zeal to protect the online experience, will leave plenty of loopholes for cheats in single player games.
borrow subject lines from your host's mail spool (optionally, do so with only a small probability -- let evolution determine which subject lines are the most effective).
Can you elaborate on that? Are you talking about some master list of effective subjects?
That story is either
a: not true
b: not all there - ie, there's more to it than you think, like the person being an ass.
because if that really is the full extent of it - if all that happened was that a person refused to be searched and was arrested, the ACLU would be on it like flies on shit, and it'd probably be posted here on slashdot or over on fark.
You will not be arrested for refusing a search. I'm not a lawyer but I feel absolutely confident in saying that. The worst thing that could possibly happen would be that the store's managemment would ask you not to return.
If you are arrested, please buy me a plasma TV with the huge settlement you get after suing them. ok?
why doesn't SCO ask a judge to issue an injunction against kernel.org/mirrors to stop them from distributing it.
If they did this, however, they would have to show a *minimal* amount of compelling evidence.
That's the great thing about their tactic. They can say whatever they want to the press and it will be printed and mulled over by the clueless masses. But, if they want to go before a judge they have to have their ducks in a row. If they showed a judge the same code they showed in those PPT slides, they'd probably be held in contempt.
At what point can we sue SCO for damaging our livelihood by spewing FUD about Linux? It's hard enough to get a job without having to worry that some employer is going to think "whoa, I better not hire him, he might surreptitiously set up a Linux box somewhere and get us all sued."
And now that I think about it, why can't we sue the SCO executives personally - not just SCO itself. I know that being a corporation normally shields the execs from such lawsuits, but in this case it seems clear that the execs are driving the company into the ground for only one purpose, to enrich themselves. They are driving the company into the ground and they are dragging our reputation down with it. It a dump truck driver takes a shortcut through your yard, you can take the driver to court. Right? So, maybe the same logic would apply to SCO. The executives are driving the company and making reckless decisions with depraved indifference. I think they should be sued.
He's not talking about someone checking your bag when you go into a store. He's talking about someone who checks your bag when you leave - to make sure you haven't stolen anything.
Personally, I tell them to piss off. If they think I'm a thief they can call the cops. I'll wait. And while I wait, I'd like to borrow a telephone directory so that I can look up the number for a lawyer because I'm pretty sure I'm going to sue them.
I've done this twice and both times they let me go.
This site has a point by point comparison of plasma and LCD. If I understand correctly all digital televisions, be they CRT, LCD or plasma can display HDTV. However, if the screen does not have the same number of pixels or the same aspect ratio of HDTV then the picture will be adjusted. FWIW I don't think I'd pay much extra for a very few extra pixels. If the best value was non-HDTV that's what I'd get. It will still display HDTV programs if I understand correctly.
have you ever even used linux??
It almost seems like anything associated with men eventually comes under some form of attack. Yes, I know there are plenty of female gamers out there, but by and large gaming is a guy thing - and I can't help but wonder if this is a motivating factor in the drive to restrict games.
The activities that society values are usually not activities that guys instinctively enjoy. Society wants us to be nice, submissive, drones - to earn our paycheck and keep quiet. But we want to be hunters and warriors. Sometimes I wonder if someone is offended by that desire.
Again I must tell you that you are AMERICA CENTRIC
It amuses me that the very first hit on google from the query "What is an MBA" just happens to be a web site in New Zealand
Here it is: The New Zealand MBA Association
Clearly, MBA is not an America-centric term. I suspect your definition of America Centric is "anything I haven't heard of" though.