Rubbish. I use Hotmail, a friend of mine uses gmail. I've not had any problems getting his mails, and I've not even had to whitelist him for the spam filter.
This story is the biggest pile of turd I've read on Slashdot - and I've read some pretty strong contenders.
Agreed. As a specific example, what exactly does your site offer that The Motley Fool (with a large user base and very high brand recognition) doesn't?
What sort of capital are we talking? If it's around $30k or under, you should have no problem funding it yorself (I can easily raise that sort of capital myself through personal savings and personal loans; as a business one can easily receive more from the banks, not counting any business development grants available to you).
If we're talking more, how are you going to pay them back? What are your revenue streams - looks like just ad-driven to me. So as a VC hoping to have made significant profit on my investment in 5 years, what is your forecast? How much do you expect to get from advertising per user? How many users are you going to attract? How many years will it take for this revenue stream to generate $200k profit, to make it worth their while.
As with the parent, my intent is not to be negative, but as someone who is very much involved in the issues of keeping a business afloat, I think you need to come up with viable answers to these questions in the form of a solid business plan before you go asking for VC. And you have to truly belive that the business plan is feasible, else even if you did get VC you'd be opening yourself up for a miserable time.
A more direct answer to your question, though, would be to attend events in the ICT sector. You'll find there are many agencies, all in a close-knit community, with the goal to support ICT companies. They will host events which are of no interest, but you can network, network, network. Once that's done, finding VCs will be no problem whatsoever, as everyone in the community will know everyone else.
Oh, by the way - many people will be displeased that their information is being shared with a tracking company. At the least it looks very unprofessional. You're hosting PHP pages, bite the bullet and write the tracking code yourself.
I don't get the attraction
on
QNX 6.3 Released
·
· Score: -1, Troll
So we have yet another Linux clone, this time giving away for free, but making companies pay stupid amounts to support them (why would companies pay this?). So why not use an existing Linux distribution that is truly free, or another long-running Linux clone like *BSD?
Creating a new OS is just asking for a whole load of new security and stability issues, when Linux has all but wiped them out.
Most of the article is just cheerleading for Mozilla
Yes, which I find annoying in an article that should be neutral. I pretty much gave up hope on gaining useful data from that article when I got to the line:
The Mozilla browser is technically better than IE. That is plain fact.
Yes, a very convincing argument he makes. Gives me real confidence in anything else he asserts.
the things needed to make the system secure [that] can't be added
As it happens, there's a number of things you state that I disagree wholeheartedly with, but I'm not going to argue them here as the main thrust of my disagreement with the OP was his stupidly jingoistic assertion that Windows is insecure by design, and that it is impossible to fix.
A rather big difference to "they should close ports by default".
Ah, the pearls of wisdom from someone who last used Windows in '93.
Microsoft OS's core was designed to run on a single user system with that user operating with administrative privilages.Networking was straped on top of that. Security was added after that. Copmatibility with older MS systems and API's were such a priority, that the things needed to make the system secure can't be added.
Remember Windows NT? And how that kernel, network stack, filesystem etc got improved and patched through its lifetime? And how Win2k was based on the same codebase? And how WinXP was based on that? Server 2003, and so it goes on...
Microsoft's OS core was not built with compatability in mind - it was built virtually from scratch - hence "New Technology". It has security built in throughout. NTFS has a powerful and fully featured ACL system.
Would you care to give concrete examples of "the things needed to make the system secure [that] can't be added"? Or did you just once read that ridiculous tripe about "shatter" attacks and quote him verbatim?
Not strictly relevant to this poster, and I can't even remember the damned link (hence the uselessness of this post): can anyone remember an article a couple of years back about a guy whose Mac was stolen, and he used script magic, and the fact the thief hadn't wiped the disk, in order to find the guy and get him arrested?
They are. If you use Windows Update then you get some of them bundled together in service packs etc, but if you actually look through the KB you'll find specific patches for individual vulnverabilities.
I've talked about this before; I think that there really is something in Moz/Firefox that causes conflicts with some hardware/driver/software setup. My home PC, with 512MB, 1.8GHz Athlon and fast HDD, takes a ludicrous time to start up Firefox - on the order of 15-20 seconds.
Starting other apps, such as postscript viewers, Acrobat, Photoshop etc are all perfectly fast. Other people don't seem to have a problem with Firefox at all, and then in threads like this some people have the same problem as me. So I'm certain that Firefox has a problem, but I'm damned if I know why that is.
Well hold on a minute: this is talking about the speed increases from a particular subsystem - the IO scheduler. Upgrading from 2.4 to 2.6 changes a hell of a lot more than just that, so your speedup could be from any number of things.
From the sound of it you're talking about perceived speed for a desktop user, as opposed to measured server throughput. If this is the case, I imagine the biggest speed increase comes from the fact that (I believe) 2.6 offers far lower latency in the kernel, allowing it to be preempted in more cases. This will make a desktop environment far more responsive.
Re:oxidation versus reduction confusion
on
Buckyballs Kill Fish
·
· Score: 5, Informative
Nope - H202 and Cl are both oxidising agents, and as such both "steal" electrons. If Buckyballs steal electrons then they too are oxidising agents. Remember the handy little mnemonic OIL RIG: Oxidation Involves Loss, Reduction Involves Gain.
I think you misunderstand how standards work. They provide a framework of things that MUST or SHOULD be implemented. They don't say "...and you MUST NOT implement anything else".
Umm...his name might make you suspicious, but that's no reason to think he's trolling. The content looks pretty rational to me - if there's something wrong with his logic, then perhaps you'd like to share your critique with those of us who think he makes sense rather than just labeling him a troll?
Well, it's not exactly sudo (as you require the target user's password, rather than just your own), but look at this.
On the left is the ticked "run as a different user" box (which only needs doing once) and on the right is the result of then double-clicking the icon as normal.
OK, so having to type in the administrator (or whoever) password is kinda annoying, but equally not requiring any password for an su operation is rather dangerous - hence sudo asks for your own password, as well as maintaining a list of sudoers.
Slashdot Mirror
Title: Hotmail Blocks Gmail Emails (and Invites)
First sentence: Emails and invitations sent to Hotmail from Gmail...[don't] arrive in the recipient's Inbox
Yup, clearly only talks about invitations, Einstein.
This story is the biggest pile of turd I've read on Slashdot - and I've read some pretty strong contenders.
Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING
What sort of capital are we talking? If it's around $30k or under, you should have no problem funding it yorself (I can easily raise that sort of capital myself through personal savings and personal loans; as a business one can easily receive more from the banks, not counting any business development grants available to you).
If we're talking more, how are you going to pay them back? What are your revenue streams - looks like just ad-driven to me. So as a VC hoping to have made significant profit on my investment in 5 years, what is your forecast? How much do you expect to get from advertising per user? How many users are you going to attract? How many years will it take for this revenue stream to generate $200k profit, to make it worth their while.
As with the parent, my intent is not to be negative, but as someone who is very much involved in the issues of keeping a business afloat, I think you need to come up with viable answers to these questions in the form of a solid business plan before you go asking for VC. And you have to truly belive that the business plan is feasible, else even if you did get VC you'd be opening yourself up for a miserable time.
A more direct answer to your question, though, would be to attend events in the ICT sector. You'll find there are many agencies, all in a close-knit community, with the goal to support ICT companies. They will host events which are of no interest, but you can network, network, network. Once that's done, finding VCs will be no problem whatsoever, as everyone in the community will know everyone else.
Oh, by the way - many people will be displeased that their information is being shared with a tracking company. At the least it looks very unprofessional. You're hosting PHP pages, bite the bullet and write the tracking code yourself.
Creating a new OS is just asking for a whole load of new security and stability issues, when Linux has all but wiped them out.
Just asking - maybe there's something about Linux news I don't understand that explains why it's repeated ad infinitum.
Yes, of course. Because when they examined the price/demand curve to find the optimum profit mark, they said:
"Y'know what? Let's increase the cost in spite of lower profit, just to piss people off"
I hear that's how big businesses work.
Yes, which I find annoying in an article that should be neutral. I pretty much gave up hope on gaining useful data from that article when I got to the line:
The Mozilla browser is technically better than IE. That is plain fact.
Yes, a very convincing argument he makes. Gives me real confidence in anything else he asserts.
You're praising the FreeBSD developers for continuing to support the current stable release series? You're pretty easy to please.
I suggest reading up on "scalability" and "caching".
Words associated with Microsoft's viewpoint: pragmatic, failsafe, contingency
Words associated with your viewpoint: dogmatic, hubris
Providing a second layer of defence is sensible and secure. It does not cast aspersions on the first layer of security.
the things needed to make the system secure [that] can't be added
As it happens, there's a number of things you state that I disagree wholeheartedly with, but I'm not going to argue them here as the main thrust of my disagreement with the OP was his stupidly jingoistic assertion that Windows is insecure by design, and that it is impossible to fix.
A rather big difference to "they should close ports by default".
Microsoft OS's core was designed to run on a single user system with that user operating with administrative privilages.Networking was straped on top of that. Security was added after that. Copmatibility with older MS systems and API's were such a priority, that the things needed to make the system secure can't be added.
Remember Windows NT? And how that kernel, network stack, filesystem etc got improved and patched through its lifetime? And how Win2k was based on the same codebase? And how WinXP was based on that? Server 2003, and so it goes on...
Microsoft's OS core was not built with compatability in mind - it was built virtually from scratch - hence "New Technology". It has security built in throughout. NTFS has a powerful and fully featured ACL system.
Would you care to give concrete examples of "the things needed to make the system secure [that] can't be added"? Or did you just once read that ridiculous tripe about "shatter" attacks and quote him verbatim?
Oh man, you almost had me there!
Here we go: I manually downloaded and unpacked the XPI file, to see the JS installer and an exe. Here's what AVG had to say about it.
I think the significance (or lack of) of this distinction is a good example of what the original poster was getting at in the first place.
Not strictly relevant to this poster, and I can't even remember the damned link (hence the uselessness of this post): can anyone remember an article a couple of years back about a guy whose Mac was stolen, and he used script magic, and the fact the thief hadn't wiped the disk, in order to find the guy and get him arrested?
They are. If you use Windows Update then you get some of them bundled together in service packs etc, but if you actually look through the KB you'll find specific patches for individual vulnverabilities.
Starting other apps, such as postscript viewers, Acrobat, Photoshop etc are all perfectly fast. Other people don't seem to have a problem with Firefox at all, and then in threads like this some people have the same problem as me. So I'm certain that Firefox has a problem, but I'm damned if I know why that is.
From the sound of it you're talking about perceived speed for a desktop user, as opposed to measured server throughput. If this is the case, I imagine the biggest speed increase comes from the fact that (I believe) 2.6 offers far lower latency in the kernel, allowing it to be preempted in more cases. This will make a desktop environment far more responsive.
Nope - H202 and Cl are both oxidising agents, and as such both "steal" electrons. If Buckyballs steal electrons then they too are oxidising agents. Remember the handy little mnemonic OIL RIG: Oxidation Involves Loss, Reduction Involves Gain.
"Prototyping" doesn't just mean "to make prototype applications"
I think you misunderstand how standards work. They provide a framework of things that MUST or SHOULD be implemented. They don't say "...and you MUST NOT implement anything else".
Umm...his name might make you suspicious, but that's no reason to think he's trolling. The content looks pretty rational to me - if there's something wrong with his logic, then perhaps you'd like to share your critique with those of us who think he makes sense rather than just labeling him a troll?
On the left is the ticked "run as a different user" box (which only needs doing once) and on the right is the result of then double-clicking the icon as normal.
OK, so having to type in the administrator (or whoever) password is kinda annoying, but equally not requiring any password for an su operation is rather dangerous - hence sudo asks for your own password, as well as maintaining a list of sudoers.
Win2k, FYI.