This is a profit driven service so if 85% of your customer base would pay significantly less its a bad system for the provider (lest we forget that it they who are providing the product). Remeber if it is not profitable to do something a company won't do it for long, so if 15% of their customers are seriously impacting the bottom line, they want to do something that affects only the 15% that are unprofitable. The part of this that bothers me is that it smacks of the bait and switch. If you tell me something is unlimited, don't bitch when I use the crap out of it, So the companies either need to change their advertising or they need to suck it up. Of course they still want it both ways.
As for your cable tv example things just don't work that way, for the Cable company it cost nearly the same to send 120 chanesl as it does to send 50, while at the same time it costs less to send all 120 to you than to give you just the 8 that you want while at the same time giving your spanish speaking neighbor a measly 6 chanels that they can comfortably understand, and the religeous lady across the street some choice as to which thief to send her money to and always giving you the opportunity to watch something you would have never admited to wanting to a salesman (admit it you gotton hooked watching some guy install under floor heating). So what i am saying is that to give you only the TV chanels that you want it would end up costing you much more than you currently pay.
Yeah you named off some heavy hitters, but what about the apache still considered a heavy hitter with much less than a 3000 lb capacity (more like 2000 if i remember right). or we could go with the OH-58D with its massive 300lb ordinance load. or the current preditor with its 120lb load. 300 *is* a lot of fire power in a machine that weighs in at about 10000 lbs total.
You see as long as no-one is looking at their code or trying to understand their APIs it is perfectly secure. Just like my freinds house with its security shutters is pefectly secure assuming no-one looks under the flowerpot next to the front door.
Not a literal one but when you are working on your obscure little project, have you ever just hit a dead end, a "you cannot move forward unless..." and after you tear at your hair, run screaming in circles you look to a referance manual and wham there is the solution.
Ifnot you are either a certifieable genious or you are not pushing your limits (or you are a certifieable genious who is *not* pushing his limits).
Books like these speed up the engeneering process a lot. Imagine that if to make a car the wheel had to be reinvented every time, sure we would learn a little more about basic wheel construction than if we just took knowing how a wheel works for granted, but we would never get around to power steering if we were still hung up about how a clutch works.
That was long winded and incoherant, but my point is... ... Robotics is still very imature like programming anything during the early 70's adn any book that furthers the art is welcome in my book.
Please excuse my crappy spelling.
But who created the content?
on
Fair IP Laws?
·
· Score: 1
Who created the content? Britney certainly didn't write her own crap. does the writer get credit for creating it? doe she get credit? what about the back up singer that only sings on one track? Or is it the Reord labels producer who brought together the "unique talents" of every one involved? I don't like the current system, but some times it is very hard to figure out who it is that created something, and unless we can address this issue clearly amongst ourselves, we will not be able to present it to a senator that is recieving money to ignore us.
I'm sorry that this seems trollish, but the issue is confusing to me
I am not sure what you have heard, but I have had very few problems with mac servers. I work at a small design and hosting firm that has about a dozen Mac servers in a production enviroment. Most of them are runing OS 9 but we aquired a g4 with OS X and moved it into production with a fractions of the problems we have had trying to set up a 'doze box. (The 'doze box is for customers that insist, and if we ever get it working we are are putting Linux on another box). Back on topic. These servers answer our complaint about using macs as servers and that was shelves full of desktop machines instead of more professional looking rackmounts in the server room
Once upon a time I wrote a spambot (assingment for a begining Java Class I never did distribute this accursed thing), and from that I figured out that most spambots are probibly pretty dumb. They follow links parsing for @ signs and then compare what they find to a pattern that can find a valid email address. but at the same time these (and most other) spiders never actualy "see" the web page. So it is not too dificult to crapflood them. Give them links to endless series of pages with valid looking, but probibly bogus email address (or better yet the address of people you don't like). just make these links in font size 1 with a color that closly, but not exactly matches the background (using the hex colorcodes you can choose a close color that is not web safe and it often renders the same color as the background), also be kind enough to include the files that start this endless loop of crap data in the exculded portion of your robots.txt to keep legitmit spiders out.
True that we will not "win" the battle against spam until it is absoulutly ilegal and enforced but with enough angry webmasters you canrender spambots absolutly useless
dude if you properly set up a user account for your girlfriend on your Linux sector (your machine does have Linux right?) and never give her root level access she will not be able to fuck up your machine. Odds are if she is not very into tech she will not even realize that she is in a limited enviroment.
I did this and my girlfriend can browse as much as she likes with no worries on my side. Nate
The other day while looking for "copy protected" disks at best buy I looked at (did not buy repeat did not buy) a Brittney Spears album and no shit it had the AOL client on it.
[joke]"The heat incinerated herds of reindeer and charred tens of thousands of evergreens across hundreds of square moles."
Well thank god the square ones are all gone. Now if we could only do something about the round variety.
See i read this to be the number of trees destroyed you know a mole 6.022e23 Now that squared times hundreds (about 200 to around 900) lets see that should be about 3*10^50 trees thats not too many well that makes much more sense [end joke]
The only thing better than self-deleting spam is self-deleting spammers.
send spam and die.... almost sounds like an anti-drug commercial
Re:.Net fails the pr0n test
on
.NETly News
·
· Score: 1
I disagree while the pure pr0n app for.Net has not been written yet. with its distributed model.Net could bring about a revolution in cross platform pr0n(tm).
Just because you can't find it's killer app doesn't mean it won't be written soon
This question is already being answered, and I for one do not care for the answer.
The folks who are reproducing are rarely as you say people who"REALLY REALLY LOVE children" instead they are by a large margin those who are uneducated enough to continue to not use reliable forms of birth control. These folks also tend to be low income and unable to compete in the current social climate, much like their parents before them.
One other thiing that I do that I have not heard mentioned is have a Spam acct that is posted in ways that bots will pick it up but people will not, and any one who emails to this address is blacklisted (no it is not the one listed here)
That would work for say filtering to specific folders in your email client, and I am already doing this , and I must say that it works, but for my general inbox, I still on occasion need to get emails from people who I have never worked with before. and I don't see how reverse filtering would help
This is how Spam works, it does hit the target (and millions of others too). To make a profit Spammers don't need or expect anything close to a 1% response rate, they get closer to a.0001%. If you send out your Ponzi scheme email to 10 Million address's (number from recent spam selling email address) you may get your 10 folks dumb enough to respond.
What you are talking about is not spam what you are speaking of is direct marketing done right , that only happens with opt in only mailing lists
good targeting requires good information and most folks are getting shy about sharing this.
I thought about your idea of putting a password on my inbox, but I realized that it would do little good.
First I would have to set up the filter, but that is the easy part the next part gets nasty.
If I am one of the few who require this password protected email, getting my customers to add this password to, lets say the subject line, they will not be happy nor will they get it right 3/4 of the time.
Third and this is where it gets odd, if these passwords became more common at some point you are going to order something online and you will need to supply this password to an outside source that seems trustworthy. They (or a disgruntled ex-employee) will in turn sell your address and password (and a couple of thousand others) to a data mining company who will distrubute it to Spamers and bamm there we are right back where we started.
While it seems like it should work I have a hard time believing that the distances are known constants (wiring can take some very odd routes) and that there aren't other bits of wierdness that could cause problems.
But I guess its no weirder than useing beer cans and watch to determine your location
Is it just me or about every five years or so (starting in about 1950). We get this rash of articles showing all these great Automated, effort saving buzzword enabled business/home.
But food from the vending machine still sucks.
Coffee makers get better every year but Starbucks still have Baristas
etc
etc
etc
The point is very little of this tech will hit mainstream in the next five years (if ever) increases in technology will be evolutionary and done one piece at a time, not revolutionary and all encompassing.
Or maybe I just need my morning coffee
3 cd's I own now have this one is shaggys latest craptacular release (don't ask) the offsprings americana, and my bare naked ladies live cd all have their own player in them.
but it gets worse. When I started to hear about all of this copy protection bs firing up I went to my local record store and paroused the "pop fluff" section, I found some very interesting verbage on the back of a Brittney Spears album and some similar stuff on nsuck's stuff.
It was hard to understand legaleaze (rhymes with sleaze) written in microfine type, they explained that not only did this disk contain it's own player but it also contained the latest version of AOL and some other craptacular software (hows that for an album with staying power). But no mention of any copy protection
No really, if it was written at a public university on a grant from a private company, I support the company getting the fruits of the research.
Public funds at a public university == public results. every time no questions asked (unless the results of the research if released into the wild would be dangerous ie: new chemical weapons)
But that is not what this is about, this is about the research software, and yeah if it was all open sourced it could speed up research times and lower costs with better results, but groups tend to be very possessive of the code they generate, and the competitive nature of research today hinders the sort of coperation that this requires.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a profit driven service so if 85% of your customer base would pay significantly less its a bad system for the provider (lest we forget that it they who are providing the product).
Remeber if it is not profitable to do something a company won't do it for long, so if 15% of their customers are seriously impacting the bottom line, they want to do something that affects only the 15% that are unprofitable. The part of this that bothers me is that it smacks of the bait and switch. If you tell me something is unlimited, don't bitch when I use the crap out of it, So the companies either need to change their advertising or they need to suck it up. Of course they still want it both ways.
As for your cable tv example things just don't work that way, for the Cable company it cost nearly the same to send 120 chanesl as it does to send 50, while at the same time it costs less to send all 120 to you than to give you just the 8 that you want while at the same time giving your spanish speaking neighbor a measly 6 chanels that they can comfortably understand, and the religeous lady across the street some choice as to which thief to send her money to and always giving you the opportunity to watch something you would have never admited to wanting to a salesman (admit it you gotton hooked watching some guy install under floor heating). So what i am saying is that to give you only the TV chanels that you want it would end up costing you much more than you currently pay.
Yeah you named off some heavy hitters, but what about the apache still considered a heavy hitter with much less than a 3000 lb capacity (more like 2000 if i remember right). or we could go with the OH-58D with its massive 300lb ordinance load. or the current preditor with its 120lb load. 300 *is* a lot of fire power in a machine that weighs in at about 10000 lbs total.
You see as long as no-one is looking at their code or trying to understand their APIs it is perfectly secure.
Just like my freinds house with its security shutters is pefectly secure assuming no-one looks under the flowerpot next to the front door.
Not a literal one but when you are working on your obscure little project, have you ever just hit a dead end, a "you cannot move forward unless..." and after you tear at your hair, run screaming in circles you look to a referance manual and wham there is the solution.
Ifnot you are either a certifieable genious or you are not pushing your limits (or you are a certifieable genious who is *not* pushing his limits).
Books like these speed up the engeneering process a lot. Imagine that if to make a car the wheel had to be reinvented every time, sure we would learn a little more about basic wheel construction than if we just took knowing how a wheel works for granted, but we would never get around to power steering if we were still hung up about how a clutch works.
That was long winded and incoherant, but my point is...
... Robotics is still very imature like programming anything during the early 70's adn any book that furthers the art is welcome in my book.
Please excuse my crappy spelling.
Who created the content?
Britney certainly didn't write her own crap.
does the writer get credit for creating it?
doe she get credit?
what about the back up singer that only sings on one track?
Or is it the Reord labels producer who brought together the "unique talents" of every one involved?
I don't like the current system, but some times it is very hard to figure out who it is that created something, and unless we can address this issue clearly amongst ourselves, we will not be able to present it to a senator that is recieving money to ignore us.
I'm sorry that this seems trollish, but the issue is confusing to me
I am not sure what you have heard, but I have had very few problems with mac servers. I work at a small design and hosting firm that has about a dozen Mac servers in a production enviroment. Most of them are runing OS 9 but we aquired a g4 with OS X and moved it into production with a fractions of the problems we have had trying to set up a 'doze box. (The 'doze box is for customers that insist, and if we ever get it working we are are putting Linux on another box).
Back on topic. These servers answer our complaint about using macs as servers and that was shelves full of desktop machines instead of more professional looking rackmounts in the server room
In a lawsuit both sides lose and the lawyers win, If one company has more money than the other it loses less badley but it still loses.
As I don't care for either company I am rooting for the lawyers dragging this out as long as possible, before giving Verisign a little smackdown.
Nate
Once upon a time I wrote a spambot (assingment for a begining Java Class I never did distribute this accursed thing), and from that I figured out that most spambots are probibly pretty dumb.
They follow links parsing for @ signs and then compare what they find to a pattern that can find a valid email address.
but at the same time these (and most other) spiders never actualy "see" the web page.
So it is not too dificult to crapflood them. Give them links to endless series of pages with valid looking, but probibly bogus email address (or better yet the address of people you don't like). just make these links in font size 1 with a color that closly, but not exactly matches the background (using the hex colorcodes you can choose a close color that is not web safe and it often renders the same color as the background), also be kind enough to include the files that start this endless loop of crap data in the exculded portion of your robots.txt to keep legitmit spiders out.
True that we will not "win" the battle against spam until it is absoulutly ilegal and enforced but with enough angry webmasters you canrender spambots absolutly useless
That actualy hurt...
just remeberthat if you use Mungemaster with the new non-orthogonal process you can experiance a 1.5% wergle alignment speed increase
dude if you properly set up a user account for your girlfriend on your Linux sector (your machine does have Linux right?) and never give her root level access she will not be able to fuck up your machine. Odds are if she is not very into tech she will not even realize that she is in a limited enviroment.
I did this and my girlfriend can browse as much as she likes with no worries on my side.
Nate
The other day while looking for "copy protected" disks at best buy I looked at (did not buy repeat did not buy) a Brittney Spears album and no shit it had the AOL client on it.
it Blew my mind
[joke]"The heat incinerated herds of reindeer and charred tens of thousands of evergreens across hundreds of square moles."
Well thank god the square ones are all gone. Now if we could only do something about the round variety.
See i read this to be the number of trees destroyed you know a mole 6.022e23
Now that squared times hundreds (about 200 to around 900)
lets see that should be about 3*10^50 trees thats not too many
well that makes much more sense
[end joke]
I forget his name, but there was a 19th century french philospher who said that the apes remained mute to avoid being put to work.
does this show that he was right?
The only thing better than self-deleting spam is self-deleting spammers.
send spam and die.... almost sounds like an anti-drug commercial
I disagree while the pure pr0n app for .Net has not been written yet. with its distributed model .Net could bring about a revolution in cross platform pr0n(tm).
Just because you can't find it's killer app doesn't mean it won't be written soon
This question is already being answered, and I for one do not care for the answer.
The folks who are reproducing are rarely as you say people who"REALLY REALLY LOVE children" instead they are by a large margin those who are uneducated enough to continue to not use reliable forms of birth control. These folks also tend to be low income and unable to compete in the current social climate, much like their parents before them.
That would work for say filtering to specific folders in your email client, and I am already doing this , and I must say that it works, but for my general inbox, I still on occasion need to get emails from people who I have never worked with before. and I don't see how reverse filtering would help
What you are talking about is not spam what you are speaking of is direct marketing done right , that only happens with opt in only mailing lists
good targeting requires good information and most folks are getting shy about sharing this.
First I would have to set up the filter, but that is the easy part the next part gets nasty.
If I am one of the few who require this password protected email, getting my customers to add this password to, lets say the subject line, they will not be happy nor will they get it right 3/4 of the time.
Third and this is where it gets odd, if these passwords became more common at some point you are going to order something online and you will need to supply this password to an outside source that seems trustworthy. They (or a disgruntled ex-employee) will in turn sell your address and password (and a couple of thousand others) to a data mining company who will distrubute it to Spamers and bamm there we are right back where we started.
It has fewer requirements than being BBB member.
It just makes me wish I had thought of it first, but at no point did they ever say thatwere not suppossed to send out reams of e-mail to the unwary.
While it seems like it should work I have a hard time believing that the distances are known constants (wiring can take some very odd routes) and that there aren't other bits of wierdness that could cause problems.
But I guess its no weirder than useing beer cans and watch to determine your location
Is it just me or about every five years or so (starting in about 1950). We get this rash of articles showing all these great Automated, effort saving buzzword enabled business/home.
But food from the vending machine still sucks.
Coffee makers get better every year but Starbucks still have Baristas
etc
etc
etc
The point is very little of this tech will hit mainstream in the next five years (if ever) increases in technology will be evolutionary and done one piece at a time, not revolutionary and all encompassing.
Or maybe I just need my morning coffee
3 cd's I own now have this one is shaggys latest craptacular release (don't ask) the offsprings americana, and my bare naked ladies live cd all have their own player in them.
but it gets worse. When I started to hear about all of this copy protection bs firing up I went to my local record store and paroused the "pop fluff" section, I found some very interesting verbage on the back of a Brittney Spears album and some similar stuff on nsuck's stuff.
It was hard to understand legaleaze (rhymes with sleaze) written in microfine type, they explained that not only did this disk contain it's own player but it also contained the latest version of AOL and some other craptacular software (hows that for an album with staying power). But no mention of any copy protection
The Answer to this question is a resounding...
Sometimes
No really, if it was written at a public university on a grant from a private company, I support the company getting the fruits of the research.
Public funds at a public university == public results. every time no questions asked (unless the results of the research if released into the wild would be dangerous ie: new chemical weapons)
But that is not what this is about, this is about the research software, and yeah if it was all open sourced it could speed up research times and lower costs with better results, but groups tend to be very possessive of the code they generate, and the competitive nature of research today hinders the sort of coperation that this requires.