Yes, but the factors you mention ultimately derive from the rule of law, which means that no crypto-currency will be successful without being government sanctioned.
The very fact that Comey presumes to speak for techies (and seems to think that Silicon Valley represents them almost exclusively) is evidence of why we should be cautious of law enforcement, as well as those who would circumvent it. It may not be so much that we fail to see the darkness that the FBI, et al. confront. Rather, it may be that we also fear darkness in those who claim to protect us without understanding and honoring the breadth of our own principles.
Sure scammers and other bad actors have exposed many flaws in their original system, but CL has adapted and it, more than any other company I can name, has done more to usefully connect people, without being intrusive or getting in the way. Even today it still functions without javascript or unnecessary personal data collection.
Your child may not get everything right away, but that's probably less important than the examples of thought experiments, and the honest effort to provide some explanation in simple terms. Often when things make an impression that way, children remember and wind up understanding years later.
It's more likely to just prevent people from publicizing their efforts. Perhaps that's what the powers that be are more concerned with, then they have plausible deniability. However, the outcome is that anything truly dangerous that comes of such work is likely to go undetected for longer.
The report is just McKinsey fishing for consulting business.
Both mobile operators and airlines have the same problems, namely regulation enforcing an UNcompetitive environment (which does not apply to the advertising, retail and media based FANG companies) and and economy that is burdened with excessive capital, allowing those so-called competitors to continue functioning with what would otherwise be crippling debt.
I've long said the U.S. telecommunications market is ripe for disruption and that could eventually change things. McKinsey will not.
Yes, links can be abused like anything else, and they don't eliminate the need for good writing. That doesn't in any way override the principle that good writing involves citing sources, and links are the best way to do that.
Setting the source and tone aside is crucial to any good analysis of a subject, so setting the Vortex source aside, I've noticed two things that seem to be relevant here. The first is that while Google is usually pretty good at blocking spam without false positives, it seems to be getting worse at that task, rather than better. Furthermore, it is notably bad detecting when an email is or is not a scam.
The second, more important, point comes at the end of the original note, and it's that Google as a whole has virtually no functional feedback mechanism for error correction. It is very hard to get any attention at all from staff, and even if you can manage it, my recent interactions simply yielded brain-dead responses and endless run around. This was with a botched Google Wallet payment where the firm sent confirmation saying "This money is now yours." but never delivered it. After many hours of investigation, there is still no real answer or means for progress.
Everybody gets things wrong sometimes, but Google seems has strayed a long way from its original "Don't be evil." motto. It now seems to do whatever benefits its bottom line, and costs the least without any regard for accuracy or allowing people to help it fix its mistakes.
> The other issue is content. After spending about an hour searching for and downloading content I didn't end up with anything that I thought was particularly worthwhile. A replacement for TV it is far from...
Right because when you flip through your 900 channels of cable everything there is always worth your attention?
Since Novell are the developers of Mono, this has potential to be more far reaching than it currently sounds. With all the anti-trust troubles, maybe M$ is realizing that that OS brand recognition is non-profitable, whereas MS Office for Linux (via Mono) is an easy entry into emerging markets.
It took me a moment to realize that the poster was trying to be sarcastic.
Yes a binary compiled just for my platform is exactly what I want. Why go through a process of determining what instructions my CPU will execute every single time I run the code?
So bloody obvious! Amazing nobody has figured this out before.
FYI - this feature (more or less) was on IBM's initial web browser for OS/2, before they ported Netscape. I remember using it almost a decade ago. I think they called it a "Web Map" and it was just a tree representation of the pages you had opened. Very simple, intuitive and useful.
One empirical difference between the two is that the Graphic Novels are not serialized; they have a finite, standalone story, rather than a continually ongoing story with a new addition every so often. I think this accounts for some of the qualitative differences which others mentioned.
As large as my video card's max resolution? That won't do it. My current workspace is 3840x3072 and I'm sure my video card can't handle that resolution. Granted, I seldom use more than half that workspace, but being limited to my video card's resolution wouldn't cut it, so I think I still want fvwm's implementation.
Where your monitor seems to be a moveable window on a workspace that is bigger than the monitor's viewable area? This feature is the one thing that's kept me with fvwm all this time. I don't like seperate desktops.
I started with fvwm years ago and still use it because I haven't found anything else that easily supports a scrollable viewport: I don't like to flip between seperate desktops, I like one big one that I scroll around on using the keyboard or mouse.
I wish I could find a good graphical configuration utility for it that uses straight gtk, though (not tcl).
that Earthlink/Mindspring will give up on blocking "residential" IP addresses? AOL seems to have already given up on that scheme.
I will not send mail through my local ISP's SMTP server as I'm not so hot on the retry settings. Consequently, I've told Earthlink/Mindspring customers that they just won't get mail from me anymore unless they change ISPs. Some of them are hopping mad at Earthlink about the whole thing. I'm sure they'd be happy to hear that Earthlink is finally going to stop blocking their incoming legitimate mail.
I run my own SMTP server and do not forward it through my ISP's SMTP server. Originally, I did this because @home, and then Comcast's mail services were so ludicrously unreliable. That's one reason.
Even now that this isn't so much of a problem, I still don't want to forward through the local ISP because I prefer different SMTP settings than those used by my service provider. For instance, I want to be notified if an email can't delivered to the destination MX within a few minutes (not hours), as is often the case with hotmail's servers. If I forward through a smarthost, I can't have this sort of customization.
I understand that many spammers have taken to using broadband + direct to mx configurations, but there are probably plenty of legitimate reasons to use such a configuration, and banning based on it is not a good answer.
I prefer keeping all documents and such on a linux server with a dedicated internet connection and using ssh/scp and zip for updating files and directory trees.
But more dynamic data such as email, address books, bookmarks, etc. is another story. As already pointed out, IMAP is the way to go on email. I use UW-IMAP w/ SSL because it setup easily under debian and integrates well with shell mail. However, it seems like Cyrus or Courier might have been a more robust solution. Comments welcome.
I'd like to setup ldap access for use with mozilla for my bookmarks and address books. I know there's a HOWTO, but it seems far from straightforward. Again comments welcome.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but the factors you mention ultimately derive from the rule of law, which means that no crypto-currency will be successful without being government sanctioned.
The very fact that Comey presumes to speak for techies (and seems to think that Silicon Valley represents them almost exclusively) is evidence of why we should be cautious of law enforcement, as well as those who would circumvent it. It may not be so much that we fail to see the darkness that the FBI, et al. confront. Rather, it may be that we also fear darkness in those who claim to protect us without understanding and honoring the breadth of our own principles.
Sure scammers and other bad actors have exposed many flaws in their original system, but CL has adapted and it, more than any other company I can name, has done more to usefully connect people, without being intrusive or getting in the way. Even today it still functions without javascript or unnecessary personal data collection.
An oldy but a goody!
Your child may not get everything right away, but that's probably less important than the examples of thought experiments, and the honest effort to provide some explanation in simple terms. Often when things make an impression that way, children remember and wind up understanding years later.
It's more likely to just prevent people from publicizing their efforts. Perhaps that's what the powers that be are more concerned with, then they have plausible deniability. However, the outcome is that anything truly dangerous that comes of such work is likely to go undetected for longer.
The report is just McKinsey fishing for consulting business.
Both mobile operators and airlines have the same problems, namely regulation enforcing an UNcompetitive environment (which does not apply to the advertising, retail and media based FANG companies) and and economy that is burdened with excessive capital, allowing those so-called competitors to continue functioning with what would otherwise be crippling debt.
I've long said the U.S. telecommunications market is ripe for disruption and that could eventually change things. McKinsey will not.
Yes, links can be abused like anything else, and they don't eliminate the need for good writing. That doesn't in any way override the principle that good writing involves citing sources, and links are the best way to do that.
Setting the source and tone aside is crucial to any good analysis of a subject, so setting the Vortex source aside, I've noticed two things that seem to be relevant here. The first is that while Google is usually pretty good at blocking spam without false positives, it seems to be getting worse at that task, rather than better. Furthermore, it is notably bad detecting when an email is or is not a scam.
The second, more important, point comes at the end of the original note, and it's that Google as a whole has virtually no functional feedback mechanism for error correction. It is very hard to get any attention at all from staff, and even if you can manage it, my recent interactions simply yielded brain-dead responses and endless run around. This was with a botched Google Wallet payment where the firm sent confirmation saying "This money is now yours." but never delivered it. After many hours of investigation, there is still no real answer or means for progress.
Everybody gets things wrong sometimes, but Google seems has strayed a long way from its original "Don't be evil." motto. It now seems to do whatever benefits its bottom line, and costs the least without any regard for accuracy or allowing people to help it fix its mistakes.
Seems very much like 800-FREE-411 but hopefully without the ads?
> The other issue is content. After spending about an hour searching for and downloading content I didn't end up with anything that I thought was particularly worthwhile. A replacement for TV it is far from...
Right because when you flip through your 900 channels of cable everything there is always worth your attention?
Since Novell are the developers of Mono, this has potential to be more far reaching than it currently sounds. With all the anti-trust troubles, maybe M$ is realizing that that OS brand recognition is non-profitable, whereas MS Office for Linux (via Mono) is an easy entry into emerging markets.
It took me a moment to realize that the poster was trying to be sarcastic.
Yes a binary compiled just for my platform is exactly what I want. Why go through a process of determining what instructions my CPU will execute every single time I run the code?
Z
Slashdot editors are beginning to remind me of Patent Officers. Prior Art(icle) anyone?
So bloody obvious! Amazing nobody has figured this out before.
FYI - this feature (more or less) was on IBM's initial web browser for OS/2, before they ported Netscape. I remember using it almost a decade ago. I think they called it a "Web Map" and it was just a tree representation of the pages you had opened. Very simple, intuitive and useful.
One empirical difference between the two is that the Graphic Novels are not serialized; they have a finite, standalone story, rather than a continually ongoing story with a new addition every so often. I think this accounts for some of the qualitative differences which others mentioned.
then perhaps it's a good thing as there has clearly been a fair amount of rankling lately.
As large as my video card's max resolution? That won't do it. My current workspace is 3840x3072 and I'm sure my video card can't handle that resolution. Granted, I seldom use more than half that workspace, but being limited to my video card's resolution wouldn't cut it, so I think I still want fvwm's implementation.
Where your monitor seems to be a moveable window on a workspace that is bigger than the monitor's viewable area? This feature is the one thing that's kept me with fvwm all this time. I don't like seperate desktops.
I started with fvwm years ago and still use it because I haven't found anything else that easily supports a scrollable viewport: I don't like to flip between seperate desktops, I like one big one that I scroll around on using the keyboard or mouse.
I wish I could find a good graphical configuration utility for it that uses straight gtk, though (not tcl).
that Earthlink/Mindspring will give up on blocking "residential" IP addresses? AOL seems to have already given up on that scheme.
I will not send mail through my local ISP's SMTP server as I'm not so hot on the retry settings. Consequently, I've told Earthlink/Mindspring customers that they just won't get mail from me anymore unless they change ISPs. Some of them are hopping mad at Earthlink about the whole thing. I'm sure they'd be happy to hear that Earthlink is finally going to stop blocking their incoming legitimate mail.
I run my own SMTP server and do not forward it through my ISP's SMTP server. Originally, I did this because @home, and then Comcast's mail services were so ludicrously unreliable. That's one reason.
Even now that this isn't so much of a problem, I still don't want to forward through the local ISP because I prefer different SMTP settings than those used by my service provider. For instance, I want to be notified if an email can't delivered to the destination MX within a few minutes (not hours), as is often the case with hotmail's servers. If I forward through a smarthost, I can't have this sort of customization.
I understand that many spammers have taken to using broadband + direct to mx configurations, but there are probably plenty of legitimate reasons to use such a configuration, and banning based on it is not a good answer.
The link worked for me as of 10:15 EDT.
However, the software itself is less than rock solid so far on my Debian Woody system:
Install went fine, ran fine, but died as soon as autocompletion tried to kick when I started typing code.
I prefer keeping all documents and such on a linux server with a dedicated internet connection and using ssh/scp and zip for updating files and directory trees.
But more dynamic data such as email, address books, bookmarks, etc. is another story. As already pointed out, IMAP is the way to go on email. I use UW-IMAP w/ SSL because it setup easily under debian and integrates well with shell mail. However, it seems like Cyrus or Courier might have been a more robust solution. Comments welcome.
I'd like to setup ldap access for use with mozilla for my bookmarks and address books. I know there's a HOWTO, but it seems far from straightforward. Again comments welcome.