Wow! Thanks for an actual helpful response. I'm going to implement some of this. Yeah, I do get some user-uploaded content (drupal site) and everything worthwhile is in the database dump anyhow.
OK buddy, why don't you find a shared web host that is: A) in the PRC, B) has an English control panel, C) offers shell access, D) has English-speaking administrators who will happily install whatever software you need, and E) doesn't cost a fortune. Aw heck, go ahead and find one that costs a fortune, after all, it's just a shared host, why not blow a lot of cash on it? Oh yeah, and it has to be unix-based, when 99% of hosts out there are Windows. And it should offer spam protection, too, because the PRC gets a ton of spam. Let me know what you come up with.
Oh, you mean such a thing doesn't exist? And we might have to make do with what's available, instead of insisting on some fairy tale host that only exists in the USA? Gosh, we won't be doing that...that might tell you a lot about how the site owner views his own site. Obviously, such a man places very little value on his own website.
I love when I ask a question, and the question gets totally ignored and people insist on the exact thing that I specifically excluded as an answer. Thanks, slashdot!
How about "my company assigned me this mess". How about "I have to use this crappy provider for geographic reasons (inside the Great Firewall of China)". I got 6 replies so far, and not one helpful one, just the typical Slashdot crap of "durrr, wave your magic wand and make everything all right" instead of "well, that's a tough one, let's figure out how we might be able to do this and hack out a solution." Nope, it's either throw money at the problem or nothing.
If I had money to burn, I wouldn't be using free software in the first place. Seriously, this whole thing boils down to money, which is the total opposite of the lack of scarcity that free software represents. The developer says, "fuck off" and the customer gets screwed. Only, the developer feels zero responsibility to his customer because he's not getting paid. Is getting paid what free software is about?
It's not so much a honest acknowledgement of the economic realities of the situation is it is the sneering attitude. Telling someone "patches welcome" is like telling a bum to get a job. You both know it isn't going to happen but you get a thrill out of it anyway.
OK, I keep hearing "use rsync" or other software. What about those of us who use shared web hosting, and don't get a unix shell, but only a control panel? Or who have a shell, but uncaring or incompetent admins who won't or can't install rsync? I know the standard slashdot response is "get a new host that does" but there are dozens of legitimate reasons that someone could be saddled with this kind of web host.
If you're not an experienced developer yourself, it is utterly impossible to contribute a patch. Developers know this and use the phrase frequently to get out of needing to change their software.
Feeling justified in being a jerk to your customers is never a good thing.
It's because "patches are welcome" is developer-speak for "fuck off". Surely you recognize this. If you're not an experienced developer yourself, it is utterly impossible to contribute a patch. Developers know this and use the phrase frequently to get out of needing to change their software.
Why do you criticize me for not working for you for free?
You're being criticized because there's some problem with your software. Instead of fixing it, you come out with "fuck off". In the real world, we call this "feeling no obligation to your customers". Why do you feel no obligation? Because it's free software. Obviously you feel very strongly that the lack of money is what is keeping you from fixing your problems, and being free software, there won't ever be any money in it. This is a huge problem with free software, and one that's not likely to go anywhere soon.
Right - because journalists are paragons of accuracy. If it's misleading, it shouldn't be in the story whatsoever. Of course, I'm not a journalist, so what do I know about writing a story.
The robber barons of the 1800s were the same way - stealing, lying, having people beaten and murdered, and today names like Carnegie and Rockefeller are looked upon as saintly, because of the charities that they founded with their ill-gotten gains. Just imagine how much more advanced the computer would be today without the corrosive effects of Microsoft. You CAN buy your way to respectability!
"While it might seem like a practical joke or a harmless, furtive glance, e-mail snooping could land you in more hot water than you'd ever expect you could be charged with a federal crime."
Sigh. They are NOT repeat NOT talking about looking over someone's shoulder, or a furtive glance. They're talking about logging into another's email account and making the (damaging) contents public. But hey, this sort of confusion is what I expect from journalists - doesn't matter if they work for the New York Times or the Daily Shopper, they're all pretty much the same.
Yeah, that's pretty much why the NSA is so fanatic about being able to break encryption. Being able to read the Japanese and German codes was a decisive advantage in winning WWII. Just imagine how different the world would be if the free nations had lost. Even accepting a peace treaty that ended the war but left Germany or Japan still standing would be an entirely different world today.
For someone who hates America so much, you certainly have a keen interest in the subject. You'd think that a sophisticated European would simply look down his nose and refuse to have anything to do with such vulgar people. More to the point, an entirely sophisticated person would not immediately jump on a tenuous connection between an email profanity filter and the whole of America being broken. It's as if you sit around and think about it all day and talk about it every chance you get, no matter how distant the current topic is.
The problem is that ignorant Westerners assume that the Chinese don't know what happened at Tiananmen Square in 1989. First of all, they call it the "June 4 Incident", which as an educated, liberal person, you know already. Second, the generally accepted viewpoint is that the government stepped in and saved Chinese society from dangerous radicals, which of course as an educated person, you know as well. And of course you are well aware that it is not illegal to access blocked websites, the government merely makes it difficult. Do you seriously expect the average Western citizen to be able to educate himself about China, given the total lack of censorship in Western society?
Sounds like somebody's got a problem with democracy. Stopping a "wrong" vote from happening is profoundly undemocratic. The very idea of voting for the "wrong" thing is undemocratic straight to the bone.
Same way as other terms like "Superpower" (nation with no sphere of influence, but true global reach), "Second world" (Soviet bloc), and "Eurotrash" (trust fund beneficiaries and dabblers in the arts, have the money to participate but are otherwise emptyheaded).
The treaty that you speak of was signed by the Soviet Union, NOT Russia. As hard as it is to believe, those two political organizations have almost nothing in common.
It ain't happening, is it? Thus, we draw the conclusion that their behavior is good, or at least acceptable. What conclusions would a reasonable man arrive at? The RIAA attorneys are succeeding at their client's objectives, as best as they can, given the slender legitimate resources available to them. One really has to admire them, evil though they may be.
BODYBALANCE is the Yoga, Tai Chi, Pilates workout that builds flexibility and strength and leaves you feeling centered and calm. Controlled breathing, concentration and a carefully structured series of stretches, moves and poses to music create a holistic workout that brings the body into a state of harmony and balance.
Yyyyyyeah, that has about 28 buzzwords in that one paragraph. I think I'll pass.
Yeah, it's called "being a good attorney". Being one yourself, you can certainly identify. The attorney's job is to present the client's arguments in the best possible light, and if he has to bend the law or ethics to do it, then that's his job. Breaking the law is OK too, as long as you don't get caught...Mike Nifong would have gotten away with it if he wasn't so outrageous. You know, I actually respect RIAA attorneys for being so balls-out for their client. We really need to hire some of them and get them on our side, they'd do quite well.
Wow. Just wow. I had no idea California had such racist voters. It's really an embarassment...this is the sort of thing that I would expect white voters in Outer Bumfuck, Mississipi to do.
Slashdot Mirror
There are cheap hosts that aren't incompetent. Total Choice Hosting is a great one, but it's in the States.
Wow! Thanks for an actual helpful response. I'm going to implement some of this. Yeah, I do get some user-uploaded content (drupal site) and everything worthwhile is in the database dump anyhow.
Oh, you mean such a thing doesn't exist? And we might have to make do with what's available, instead of insisting on some fairy tale host that only exists in the USA? Gosh, we won't be doing that...that might tell you a lot about how the site owner views his own site. Obviously, such a man places very little value on his own website.
I love when I ask a question, and the question gets totally ignored and people insist on the exact thing that I specifically excluded as an answer. Thanks, slashdot!
Control panel != Cpanel. Cpanel is merely one of many.
How about "my company assigned me this mess". How about "I have to use this crappy provider for geographic reasons (inside the Great Firewall of China)". I got 6 replies so far, and not one helpful one, just the typical Slashdot crap of "durrr, wave your magic wand and make everything all right" instead of "well, that's a tough one, let's figure out how we might be able to do this and hack out a solution." Nope, it's either throw money at the problem or nothing.
It's not so much a honest acknowledgement of the economic realities of the situation is it is the sneering attitude. Telling someone "patches welcome" is like telling a bum to get a job. You both know it isn't going to happen but you get a thrill out of it anyway.
OK, I keep hearing "use rsync" or other software. What about those of us who use shared web hosting, and don't get a unix shell, but only a control panel? Or who have a shell, but uncaring or incompetent admins who won't or can't install rsync? I know the standard slashdot response is "get a new host that does" but there are dozens of legitimate reasons that someone could be saddled with this kind of web host.
If you're not an experienced developer yourself, it is utterly impossible to contribute a patch. Developers know this and use the phrase frequently to get out of needing to change their software.
Feeling justified in being a jerk to your customers is never a good thing.
It's tempting to assume that WWII was a foregone conclusion, but it's classic 20/20 hindsight.
Why do you criticize me for not working for you for free?
You're being criticized because there's some problem with your software. Instead of fixing it, you come out with "fuck off". In the real world, we call this "feeling no obligation to your customers". Why do you feel no obligation? Because it's free software. Obviously you feel very strongly that the lack of money is what is keeping you from fixing your problems, and being free software, there won't ever be any money in it. This is a huge problem with free software, and one that's not likely to go anywhere soon.
Right - because journalists are paragons of accuracy. If it's misleading, it shouldn't be in the story whatsoever. Of course, I'm not a journalist, so what do I know about writing a story.
The robber barons of the 1800s were the same way - stealing, lying, having people beaten and murdered, and today names like Carnegie and Rockefeller are looked upon as saintly, because of the charities that they founded with their ill-gotten gains. Just imagine how much more advanced the computer would be today without the corrosive effects of Microsoft. You CAN buy your way to respectability!
Sigh. They are NOT repeat NOT talking about looking over someone's shoulder, or a furtive glance. They're talking about logging into another's email account and making the (damaging) contents public. But hey, this sort of confusion is what I expect from journalists - doesn't matter if they work for the New York Times or the Daily Shopper, they're all pretty much the same.
Yeah, that's pretty much why the NSA is so fanatic about being able to break encryption. Being able to read the Japanese and German codes was a decisive advantage in winning WWII. Just imagine how different the world would be if the free nations had lost. Even accepting a peace treaty that ended the war but left Germany or Japan still standing would be an entirely different world today.
For someone who hates America so much, you certainly have a keen interest in the subject. You'd think that a sophisticated European would simply look down his nose and refuse to have anything to do with such vulgar people. More to the point, an entirely sophisticated person would not immediately jump on a tenuous connection between an email profanity filter and the whole of America being broken. It's as if you sit around and think about it all day and talk about it every chance you get, no matter how distant the current topic is.
The problem is that ignorant Westerners assume that the Chinese don't know what happened at Tiananmen Square in 1989. First of all, they call it the "June 4 Incident", which as an educated, liberal person, you know already. Second, the generally accepted viewpoint is that the government stepped in and saved Chinese society from dangerous radicals, which of course as an educated person, you know as well. And of course you are well aware that it is not illegal to access blocked websites, the government merely makes it difficult. Do you seriously expect the average Western citizen to be able to educate himself about China, given the total lack of censorship in Western society?
But are the scatholics[sic] raging bigots like you are?
Sounds like somebody's got a problem with democracy. Stopping a "wrong" vote from happening is profoundly undemocratic. The very idea of voting for the "wrong" thing is undemocratic straight to the bone.
Same way as other terms like "Superpower" (nation with no sphere of influence, but true global reach), "Second world" (Soviet bloc), and "Eurotrash" (trust fund beneficiaries and dabblers in the arts, have the money to participate but are otherwise emptyheaded).
The treaty that you speak of was signed by the Soviet Union, NOT Russia. As hard as it is to believe, those two political organizations have almost nothing in common.
It ain't happening, is it? Thus, we draw the conclusion that their behavior is good, or at least acceptable. What conclusions would a reasonable man arrive at? The RIAA attorneys are succeeding at their client's objectives, as best as they can, given the slender legitimate resources available to them. One really has to admire them, evil though they may be.
Yyyyyyeah, that has about 28 buzzwords in that one paragraph. I think I'll pass.
Yeah, it's called "being a good attorney". Being one yourself, you can certainly identify. The attorney's job is to present the client's arguments in the best possible light, and if he has to bend the law or ethics to do it, then that's his job. Breaking the law is OK too, as long as you don't get caught...Mike Nifong would have gotten away with it if he wasn't so outrageous. You know, I actually respect RIAA attorneys for being so balls-out for their client. We really need to hire some of them and get them on our side, they'd do quite well.
Wow. Just wow. I had no idea California had such racist voters. It's really an embarassment...this is the sort of thing that I would expect white voters in Outer Bumfuck, Mississipi to do.