Yes, near any flavor of UNIX is better than Winblows (though I find 2000 to be pretty stable). Yes, it is a legitimate choice for you to make. Yes, I know how to use it. Yes, it's more secure.
The fact is, though, about 95% of the desktops are running Windows with IE, and about 4% are running Macintosh, and about 1% or less are running *NIX.
It's not UMG's job to make UNIX popular. The fact is that it's not. Should they spend twice as much money to support 1% or less of their target market? It's called the law of diminishing returns, and the numbers just aren't there yet.
If you listen to the radio, the station is paying the copyright holder for you. If i'm not mistaken, the fee can be quite high for the broadcaster.
You're quite mistaken. In actuality, the RIAA pays the _stations_ to play the music. It's called payola, and it's been going on for a long time now. It's yet another way the RIAA forces their crappy pop bands on us. That's what Tom Petty is singing about in his new song "The last DJ".
I didn't understand why NASA dropped the book idea. They said it would cost $15,000. Isn't this a paltry sum as far as books go? Gosh, they might have made millions on the thing, but certainly they could have covered the cost of making it.
In this age of the government cutting funding for NASA, this book could have been a great boon.
Maybe I'm missing something. Were they planning to give away the book for free?
In the conversion to Hotmail they employeed scipts and automation tools builtin to windows. They moved because Windows 2000 was faster and more efficient. It is obviously stable as any honest person running W2K/XP can tell you.
I consider myself an honest person, and I disagree. I have a lot of experience (trying) to use PERL for ASP. If you run VBScript on your ASP server, it's probably stable (though I've never actually tried it). Try it with PERL sometime. You'll need to write a script to reboot the machine once or twice a day once you start getting some traffic.
If you want to use PERL, the only way to go is UNIX/Apache/ModPERL.
I moved to a complete whitelist solution about 3 years ago. Previously I used to use the "Bcc" method of filtering, but stopped doing that after a friend invited me to a party, and it accidentally got chucked in my (public) spam archive.
<Karmawhore action="on">
Well he (or she) is not much of a friend if they BCC'd you on a party email, is he (or she)? I mean, sure, I'll invite Richard, but I don't want all the cool people who I sent this to to know that **I** invited him. He'll just show up and I'll have plausible deniability.
</karmawhore>
I asked this question in the form of an article, but as with all articles I've submitted, the nameless editor rejected it without even giving a reason. So I've waited for it to become on topic for some time now.
This box that the article links to costs a whopping $1700! For that price you could get a TIVO and lifetime subscription and have money left over to get your mom a TIVO with a lifetime subscription for Christmas (or for un-Christmas if you're a Jehovah's witness).
Now, it seems to me you could build something with no DRM built into it for cheap. Does anyone who has experience with this want to tell me how to go about it? I really want to just build it into my existing computer, since I have my PC in the living room already.
1). Is there a video capture card that's up to snuff? 2). Assuming I buy a big-ass SCSI for TV to live in, could I record TV and do stuff (other than quake or NWN, I guess) at the same time? Or should I just not kid myself and build a new system? In this case, can I cheap out on the system, or do I need a high performance one like the one I've got already? 3). Do the free internet services offer the same sort of stuff as TIVO. Anyone have experience with both? 4). Should I just upgrade to digital cable and get the free DVR that comes with that now (here in Austin with Time Warner)
Anyway, there are so many factors to consider I'd really like some feedback on this from those of you who have experience in the matter.
And you'll have a real winner. Probably several other techniques could be combined as well, but back when I wrote a program just to check all of the from IPs in an email to see if any of them were open relays, I got around 80% filtering with very few false positives.
Furthermore, you can assign a pretty good probability number based on what sort of open relay it is (i.e. verified, unverified, spam server, merely unsecured server, etc). If it comes from a spam server, the chances are 100% that it's spam. If it comes from a dialup server, the chances are about 99.9999%. If it comes from an automatically verified open relay, that's merely unsecured, the chances are more like 60%.
The open relay thing really intrigued me because it has NOTHING to do with the message body, and it was my belief at the time that there was no good way to filter based on message content.
However, combine this with bayes, and I'll bet you'll have something grand.
Also, a great feature would be a multi-tiered identifier, so that you could have the 99.999% sure spam filtered into one folder, and the 75% sure spam filtered into another. You'd have to sift through the 75%, but probably could just leave the 99% alone.
so..the bigger your head is the more intelligent you are ?
if that was true wouldnt there be some evolutionary trend towards larger and larger heads ?? pre homo sapien men were considerably larger and had more cranial capacity. they dont seem to have the extra computational capacity to go with it however.
Okay, I'll bite.
Many scientists think that pre-humans were indeed smarter than us. Being smarter does not guarantee being more civilized or technologically advanced. Dolphins and blue whales both have larger, more convoluted and interconnected brains than us. It's quite possible they're more intelligent (I think so, but how do you prove it?).
As for us evolving larger brains, our current stage of evolution is not necessarily one of upward progression. People on the whole don't pick their mates because of their big heads. Most pick them for their beauty. Beauty and intelligence are not necessarily linked.
Very stupid people can survive in this world, and very smart people can die of starvation. Survival of the fittest doesn't apply very well to human development.
Hasn't it occured to anyone that the royalties from the book might EXCEED $15k and actually make NASA a lot of money? Considering how much public interest and controversy this caused, I think that millions of dollars would not be an unreasonable expected return.
$15k is very small potatoes compared to how much money the book would make. By cancelling it, they are passing up easy revenue.
Any high-school physics student should be able to counter all of the arguments in the "documentary".
If you believe in the "fake", you believe in it despite any real evidence that it was faked. Learn to think for yourselves without having NASA spend $15 k on a book.
Why do you think there was no NASA scientist to counter the absurd arguments in the "documentary"? The closest thing was a scientist who was allowed to say "there are a lot of crackpot theories out there".
Do you really believe that NASA couldn't counter the arguments point by point? Any astrophysicist could. That's why they didn't have one on the show.
The article doesn't say anything approaching the Slashdot blurb. It says you can order pay channels without having to subscribe to premium service.
They can still make you get standard service. Here in Austin Tx, you can't get pay-per-view unless you have digital cable (from Time Warner).
Why does/. continually misreport the news in such a way as to sound appealing to the readers? What does it accomplish? Speaking for myself, it just annoys the hell out of me when I find out the truth.
"It's a big issue right now because the states are in big-time fiscal distress," said Nathaniel Trelease, a Denver tax lawyer and chief executive officer of WebCredenza, an online provider of legal and professional education services. "Most states are running budget deficits, and they're looking ever more aggressively for ways to stem the erosion of their tax bases."
So aggressively that they're willing to stomp on the constitution before setting it on fire to burn the flag with.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it unconstitutional for states to impose tariffs on each other? Isn't that why there is no sales tax on goods bought in another state?
Yes, the computer can make a very convincing showing playing a game where 100% of information is available, such as chess (but not go, yet).
But in a game such as bridge, where there is missing information, and the computer has to guess, computers are AFAIK, still woefully inadequate.
I once tried to write a spades program. The play turned out to be nearly sub-par, but the bid was ridiculously difficult to program. Not to say that because I couldn't do it, it can't be done, but me and a good partner could whip any computer opponent I'm aware of. Probably the same for bridge, even though I can't even call myself a novice player.
Of course, unless an impartial observer enters the computer's cards, you can't be sure that it's not cheating without disassembling the damn thing.:)
Might it have something to do with the fact that The Phantom Menace was absolutely horrible? I could crap on celluloid and record cats having sex for the soundtrack and come up with a better film.
I almost didn't see AOTC, just because TPM was so bad, but I'm glad I did.
...when I said I could make the big bucks by patenting the use of wiping with toilet paper. I mean, heck, I figured I'd be doing the patent office a favor.
If you really wanna help them out, patent a method for wiping with software patent applications. That way we can cut down on the smell and the useless trash at the same time. Let's see, how about:
This patent describes a method of cleaning one's rectum after the act of defecation utilizing unexamined software patent applications. The method, briefly described, is thus:
1. Obtain a job at the patent office
2. Gather together all patent applications mentioning the words or phrases "one-click", "e-commerce", "software", "Amazon", or "EBay".
3. To soften the paper, crumple up each individual sheet of the application. Unravel it, then crumple it again. Repeat this process about 15 times per sheet, or until it is quite soft.
4. Eat a meal with lots of fiber.
5. Moniter your gastrointestinal system. Be on the alert for a sort of pushing sensation on the inside of your rectum.
6. Go to a designated place for the excretion of said pressure-causing agent, taking with you the softened patent applications.
7. Defecate normally.
8. Use the softened applications afterwards by rubbing them along your rectum in short vertical sweeps. Deposit them into the excretion facility when they have been thus used.
9. Flush the facility
So rarely do I see a post where someone says "I am a lawyer specializing in X", where X is the subject in dispute on/.
Much, much more often, I see endless "IANAL, but...". So, I have my own ask slashdot. What is the damn point of asking legal questions here? This is news for nerds, not news for barristers.
You've sent statistics into a place where they just don't want to be. Here's an example that might clear things up: if a group of people goes to our legal system arguing that the United States is on the continent of Africa, they should see a 0% success rate. Anything other than a 0% success rate indicates that there's a problem with our system. You don't have to see a 100% or even a 50% rate in order to realize that something is wrong.
Well, IANAL, but there's no *law* against the US being on the continent of Africa, is there? IIRC, there is also nothing in the constitution about the US being located in Africa. You're gonna have to come up with a stronger argument than that!
VCC isn't an option for me simply because I find the idea of having a Wizard dump loads of boilerplate code all over an application simply offensive. I thought the point of inheritance was to remove the need for cut-and-paste duplication of this kind - isn't it supposed to clear all that crap out of the way?
First of all, you are confusing vc++ with MFC. Vc++ is merely the compiler, IDE, etc. MFC is the object model you are complaining about. MFC is really not that bad, once you get used to it, and wizard-generated code can come in quite handy. It's very easy to criticize, but why don't you try encapsulating the WinAPI sometime, and we'll see what you come up with.
For the truly discriminating hackers among you, check out the WTL, or windows template library. It is a replacement for MFC that takes a more object oriented approach to the problem of encapsulating the Win32 API. It's kind of like an STL for windows. It is missing some stuff from MFC, such as CSocket, and CWinThread, but if you know anything about sockets and threads, you know that those classes are really thin wrappers anyway, and you're just as well off without them.
The WTL was written by one guy at microsoft with a passion for OO (imagine that). Amazingly enough, it is actually available from Microsoft's own site! However, MS offers no tech support for it (don't worry, you won't need it, and it comes with source anyway). It is available here.
I attribute the fact that they allow you to download it to the following fact: you cannot write an MFC GUI in an ATL com object without the WTL. Period. End of story. However, you CAN with the WTL. Try it out. You'll like it. I guarantee it.
Also, waging a technological war on the RIAA will only be possible if we are afforded the same legal advantages they are, in order to make the playing field level. I can guarantee if you are caught r00ting the RIAA's site that you'll be branded a terrorist and thrown in jail.
What if you suspect them of distributing your copyrighted works? I suspect that they've been distributing the novel that I've been working on. Disclaimer: only pay attention to what I'm saying if you have a lawyer and a buncha money.
Slashdot Mirror
yet...
Yes, near any flavor of UNIX is better than Winblows (though I find 2000 to be pretty stable). Yes, it is a legitimate choice for you to make. Yes, I know how to use it. Yes, it's more secure.
The fact is, though, about 95% of the desktops are running Windows with IE, and about 4% are running Macintosh, and about 1% or less are running *NIX.
It's not UMG's job to make UNIX popular. The fact is that it's not. Should they spend twice as much money to support 1% or less of their target market? It's called the law of diminishing returns, and the numbers just aren't there yet.
Mod away.
You're quite mistaken. In actuality, the RIAA pays the _stations_ to play the music. It's called payola, and it's been going on for a long time now. It's yet another way the RIAA forces their crappy pop bands on us. That's what Tom Petty is singing about in his new song "The last DJ".
I didn't understand why NASA dropped the book idea. They said it would cost $15,000. Isn't this a paltry sum as far as books go? Gosh, they might have made millions on the thing, but certainly they could have covered the cost of making it.
In this age of the government cutting funding for NASA, this book could have been a great boon.
Maybe I'm missing something. Were they planning to give away the book for free?
I consider myself an honest person, and I disagree. I have a lot of experience (trying) to use PERL for ASP. If you run VBScript on your ASP server, it's probably stable (though I've never actually tried it). Try it with PERL sometime. You'll need to write a script to reboot the machine once or twice a day once you start getting some traffic.
If you want to use PERL, the only way to go is UNIX/Apache/ModPERL.
<Karmawhore action="on">
Well he (or she) is not much of a friend if they BCC'd you on a party email, is he (or she)? I mean, sure, I'll invite Richard, but I don't want all the cool people who I sent this to to know that **I** invited him. He'll just show up and I'll have plausible deniability.
</karmawhore>
I asked this question in the form of an article, but as with all articles I've submitted, the nameless editor rejected it without even giving a reason. So I've waited for it to become on topic for some time now.
This box that the article links to costs a whopping $1700! For that price you could get a TIVO and lifetime subscription and have money left over to get your mom a TIVO with a lifetime subscription for Christmas (or for un-Christmas if you're a Jehovah's witness).
Now, it seems to me you could build something with no DRM built into it for cheap. Does anyone who has experience with this want to tell me how to go about it? I really want to just build it into my existing computer, since I have my PC in the living room already.
1). Is there a video capture card that's up to snuff?
2). Assuming I buy a big-ass SCSI for TV to live in, could I record TV and do stuff (other than quake or NWN, I guess) at the same time? Or should I just not kid myself and build a new system? In this case, can I cheap out on the system, or do I need a high performance one like the one I've got already?
3). Do the free internet services offer the same sort of stuff as TIVO. Anyone have experience with both?
4). Should I just upgrade to digital cable and get the free DVR that comes with that now (here in Austin with Time Warner)
Anyway, there are so many factors to consider I'd really like some feedback on this from those of you who have experience in the matter.
I've never heard of this concept. Why can't we use super-concentrated radio waves as force fields to guard against space debris?
How can it be that just flashing a light wave at something will cause it to move?
The article just assumes that we all knew about radio waves having force, whereas I was laboring under the impression that they had none.
You obviously have not played the leaked doom demo.
And you'll have a real winner. Probably several other techniques could be combined as well, but back when I wrote a program just to check all of the from IPs in an email to see if any of them were open relays, I got around 80% filtering with very few false positives.
Furthermore, you can assign a pretty good probability number based on what sort of open relay it is (i.e. verified, unverified, spam server, merely unsecured server, etc). If it comes from a spam server, the chances are 100% that it's spam. If it comes from a dialup server, the chances are about 99.9999%. If it comes from an automatically verified open relay, that's merely unsecured, the chances are more like 60%.
The open relay thing really intrigued me because it has NOTHING to do with the message body, and it was my belief at the time that there was no good way to filter based on message content.
However, combine this with bayes, and I'll bet you'll have something grand.
Also, a great feature would be a multi-tiered identifier, so that you could have the 99.999% sure spam filtered into one folder, and the 75% sure spam filtered into another. You'd have to sift through the 75%, but probably could just leave the 99% alone.
Basically just sign her up for as much nasty porn spam as you can figure out how to sign her up for.
I want her email address!!!
BWahahahahah
P.S., her IP wouldn't hurt either.
Okay, I'll bite.
Many scientists think that pre-humans were indeed smarter than us. Being smarter does not guarantee being more civilized or technologically advanced. Dolphins and blue whales both have larger, more convoluted and interconnected brains than us. It's quite possible they're more intelligent (I think so, but how do you prove it?).
As for us evolving larger brains, our current stage of evolution is not necessarily one of upward progression. People on the whole don't pick their mates because of their big heads. Most pick them for their beauty. Beauty and intelligence are not necessarily linked.
Very stupid people can survive in this world, and very smart people can die of starvation. Survival of the fittest doesn't apply very well to human development.
Hasn't it occured to anyone that the royalties from the book might EXCEED $15k and actually make NASA a lot of money? Considering how much public interest and controversy this caused, I think that millions of dollars would not be an unreasonable expected return.
$15k is very small potatoes compared to how much money the book would make. By cancelling it, they are passing up easy revenue.
Any high-school physics student should be able to counter all of the arguments in the "documentary".
If you believe in the "fake", you believe in it despite any real evidence that it was faked. Learn to think for yourselves without having NASA spend $15 k on a book.
Why do you think there was no NASA scientist to counter the absurd arguments in the "documentary"? The closest thing was a scientist who was allowed to say "there are a lot of crackpot theories out there".
Do you really believe that NASA couldn't counter the arguments point by point? Any astrophysicist could. That's why they didn't have one on the show.
The article doesn't say anything approaching the Slashdot blurb. It says you can order pay channels without having to subscribe to premium service.
/. continually misreport the news in such a way as to sound appealing to the readers? What does it accomplish? Speaking for myself, it just annoys the hell out of me when I find out the truth.
They can still make you get standard service. Here in Austin Tx, you can't get pay-per-view unless you have digital cable (from Time Warner).
Why does
"It's a big issue right now because the states are in big-time fiscal distress," said Nathaniel Trelease, a Denver tax lawyer and chief executive officer of WebCredenza, an online provider of legal and professional education services. "Most states are running budget deficits, and they're looking ever more aggressively for ways to stem the erosion of their tax bases."
So aggressively that they're willing to stomp on the constitution before setting it on fire to burn the flag with.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it unconstitutional for states to impose tariffs on each other? Isn't that why there is no sales tax on goods bought in another state?
Yes, the computer can make a very convincing showing playing a game where 100% of information is available, such as chess (but not go, yet).
:)
But in a game such as bridge, where there is missing information, and the computer has to guess, computers are AFAIK, still woefully inadequate.
I once tried to write a spades program. The play turned out to be nearly sub-par, but the bid was ridiculously difficult to program. Not to say that because I couldn't do it, it can't be done, but me and a good partner could whip any computer opponent I'm aware of. Probably the same for bridge, even though I can't even call myself a novice player.
Of course, unless an impartial observer enters the computer's cards, you can't be sure that it's not cheating without disassembling the damn thing.
Might it have something to do with the fact that The Phantom Menace was absolutely horrible? I could crap on celluloid and record cats having sex for the soundtrack and come up with a better film.
I almost didn't see AOTC, just because TPM was so bad, but I'm glad I did.
If you really wanna help them out, patent a method for wiping with software patent applications. That way we can cut down on the smell and the useless trash at the same time. Let's see, how about:
This patent describes a method of cleaning one's rectum after the act of defecation utilizing unexamined software patent applications. The method, briefly described, is thus:
1. Obtain a job at the patent office
2. Gather together all patent applications mentioning the words or phrases "one-click", "e-commerce", "software", "Amazon", or "EBay".
3. To soften the paper, crumple up each individual sheet of the application. Unravel it, then crumple it again. Repeat this process about 15 times per sheet, or until it is quite soft.
4. Eat a meal with lots of fiber.
5. Moniter your gastrointestinal system. Be on the alert for a sort of pushing sensation on the inside of your rectum.
6. Go to a designated place for the excretion of said pressure-causing agent, taking with you the softened patent applications.
7. Defecate normally.
8. Use the softened applications afterwards by rubbing them along your rectum in short vertical sweeps. Deposit them into the excretion facility when they have been thus used.
9. Flush the facility
I agree, I had the same experience, as did my girlfriend.
I can't vouch for c2it, but I can definately say that Paypal is no good.
I eventually got my money back, but it was a big hassle.
Search for complaints on the Better Business Bureau website, and you'll find a whole bunch of complaints just like this one.
Much, much more often, I see endless "IANAL, but...". So, I have my own ask slashdot. What is the damn point of asking legal questions here? This is news for nerds, not news for barristers.
Well, IANAL, but there's no *law* against the US being on the continent of Africa, is there? IIRC, there is also nothing in the constitution about the US being located in Africa. You're gonna have to come up with a stronger argument than that!
First of all, you are confusing vc++ with MFC. Vc++ is merely the compiler, IDE, etc. MFC is the object model you are complaining about. MFC is really not that bad, once you get used to it, and wizard-generated code can come in quite handy. It's very easy to criticize, but why don't you try encapsulating the WinAPI sometime, and we'll see what you come up with.
For the truly discriminating hackers among you, check out the WTL, or windows template library. It is a replacement for MFC that takes a more object oriented approach to the problem of encapsulating the Win32 API. It's kind of like an STL for windows. It is missing some stuff from MFC, such as CSocket, and CWinThread, but if you know anything about sockets and threads, you know that those classes are really thin wrappers anyway, and you're just as well off without them.
The WTL was written by one guy at microsoft with a passion for OO (imagine that). Amazingly enough, it is actually available from Microsoft's own site! However, MS offers no tech support for it (don't worry, you won't need it, and it comes with source anyway). It is available here.
I attribute the fact that they allow you to download it to the following fact: you cannot write an MFC GUI in an ATL com object without the WTL. Period. End of story. However, you CAN with the WTL. Try it out. You'll like it. I guarantee it.
What if you suspect them of distributing your copyrighted works? I suspect that they've been distributing the novel that I've been working on. Disclaimer: only pay attention to what I'm saying if you have a lawyer and a buncha money.