So, the free and open source solution has won a competition. Is the point now to somehow compel Diebold to seriously consider actually using this open source solution?
While there is some truth in that, I clearly was/.ing for years before I got sucked into wiki. Sorry it took me so long to notice your reply...I was...over there.
While it is true that this happens on a regular basis, admins and regular contributors revert such edits very quickly on average. I know I spend a lot more time these days watching [[Special:Recentchanges]] than I do reading slashdot. I'd almost forgotten I had an account here.
The US Department of Vetern Affairs created VistA for it's hospitals. It includes an elaborate physician scheduling package. It is in the public domain. The CPRS component provides a GUI view that many physicians and most clerks like.
OpenVistA is a commerialized flavor of the public domain software, which you can have installed and maintained from companies such as Medsphere.
You went to great pain and expense to slander the internet in the eyes of the computer-phobic media. Congratulations. I hope you someday grow a conscience, you filthy pigfucker.
I dunno if I'd like a moderation system applied to the articles themselves (or even sections of articles.)
But a/. moderation system would probably apply quite nicely to the Discussion posts about an article. In wiki* the discussions themselves are mutable though.
Perhaps if article creators did "own" their articles...and only they (or admins) could modify existing articles, based on moderated discussion? Might be tricky to implement.
Then again, that seems to be slowly happening anyhow. As articles are vandalized and reverted now, they get "protected." That seems ultimately to have the same effect as a complicated moderation scheme might.
I apologize for that age related barb. You are correct, that was excessive.
I note from your response, that you seems to be mistaking my post for someone else's. I have never repled to one of your posts before. Please note that ANYONE can reply to a post as "Anonymous Coward." You can too.
Please relax. Do not take the vitriolic slashdot posts personally - they truly are not. Judging by your fairly high UID, your account is relatively new. I assume that you are younger than the average slashdot (/.) reader. Your nic however, evokes the persona of Tricky Dick - Richard Nixon. That implies you are an older person, who certainly would understand the tin-foil-hat references.
I tried to make my post informative, as well humorous. You apparently didn't understand the very common/. reference about tin-foil-hats, and you likely were not the only one. Perhaps you have encountered similar ineloquent responses to other posts you have made. I don't know.
Regardless, I have no intention of inciting a flamewar. If you do, please direct your ire towards my journal.
It's been a little over three years right? You don't remember the little story about the guy on the plane taken over by hostages calling home one last time (while the plane was low) and discovering the fate of some of the other planes?
"Uhh, I've got a plastic knife from my breakfast..."
Alegedly, the passengers mounted a concerted assault against the hijackers because of that information. That plane crashed in the middle of nowhere in Pennsylvania.
1) I do not street race. 2) I have never raced an automobile. 3) I think the street racing culture is insane.
4) I *OF COURSE* have many times also tried the lights in San Diego AT the speed limit, as well as 5MPH below, as well as 10MPH below. NOTHING works. On approach, certain lights will always turn red. 5) The San Diego typical traffic flow is 20-30MPH over the speed limit. Going only 5-15 MPH over the limit is dangerous (the DIFFERENCE is speed of moving vehicles is much more dangerous than simply going with the flow of normal moving heavy traffic.) I am very well aware that different regions have very different patterns - in San Diego, traffic moves regardless of arbitrary posted limits. In Oklahoma, the majority of drivers stay at the speed limit - a minority go as much as 5MPH over. When they visit California, they cause accidents. 6) The San Diego Union Tribune in the last few years (sorry, I recycled my dead-tree versions) had articles discussing some of the city engineers tactics wrt screwing up the lights. Sometimes to foil red-light-runners, sometimes to discourage street racing. 7) There are essentially *no* old timer-based lights in San Diego. Almost all have ambulance detectors, and a bunch have red light cameras. 8) Traffic lights are a significant revenue source for the city. RL Cameras make the revenue collection much easier, consistent, as well as (ultimately) cheaper. Roads are no safer, since it is now legal (or at least accepted) to run any OTHER red light in San Diego - if there's no camera it can be run - no self-respecting cop will ever lower themselves to doing the work that the robot/cameras do...they need only concern themselves with 'real' crime. (HA!) 9) Traffic lights in San Diego are used to keep cars OFF the highways - by pushing the bottleneck(s) to the side-streets, the highways (in theory) move. In practice, it doesn't work at all, but it's clear (from just a single morning's commute from Pacific Beach PB) that the purpose of the lights is to prevent optimum traffic flow.
In parts of San Diego, the traffic lights get completely fucked up at night time, in an attempt to reduce street racing.
Not sure if it's purely timing, or distance sensoring, but either way, it seems to work - that is, piss the shit out of someone like me driving *only* 5-10 MPH over speed limit. After 10PM, the lights turn red on approach no matter what speed you are going.
The memory makes me quite happy to not live there anymore!
His article specicily mentions 60 year olds. Methinks he's clever in targeting people old enough to be scared of death, but still have a nest egg ready for the latest snake-oil fountain-of-youth. I think my parents subscribe to Prevention (I think that's it, anyhow) the magazine dedicated to such cure-alls.
Agreed. Whatever disks he has in it will melt in the summertime. Maybe running the backup server only once a week when the outdoor temperature is over 50 deg. f.? My unattached garage had huge temperature fluctuations. And an occasional washing machine overflow.
Oh, don't get your undies in a twist over this - there's nothing untoward going on here.
<scary>The national press, including United Press International (UPI), were excluded from yesterday's event, at Mr. Tenet's request, organizers said.</scary>
Aw shucks, you found me out (or did you just take the painful time to go back through my older posts?)
Yeah, I think the more appropriate response to 9/11 would have been nuclear retaliation. WTF are we doing today? Manufacturing martyrs. For each martyr, we in turn manufacture dozens to hundreds of new recruits for alQ. et al.
Do I then bemoan human rights violations? Well yeah, I do, considering we're attacking the wrong fucking target(s)!
The significant difference is that I can do nothing about the GWB led oil imperialism. But in the realm of internet etiquitte, a/. comment here or there might possibly have a positive effect.
Glad to have amused you. Gotta go now though - the voices are talking to me again, and I can hear them through my tinfoil hat, my tinfoil earplugs, and my tinfoil earmuffs.
If a small group decided that slashdot was politically unsettling (and they'd have quite a lot to go on) and decided to take it down for a few days I expect that most of us would be annoyed.
There seems to have been a tremendous effect on overall web traffic recently. The 'recovery' period seems incredibly rapid however.
Anyone know how to gauge whether this had any real effect on total spam sent on the (whole) internet? Also, anyone know difinitively what the start/stop times of the "attack" were?
I know the spamhauses themselves were not targetted. Does this merely reflect a couple hundred thousand people smacking the root nameservers with obscure domain lookups? Or was the screensaver using explicit IP addresses?
Well, we'll have to wait and see how this all pans out. I wish I shared your optimism.
One minor nitpick though, the primary focus of this approach to increase the spamhaus' employers' bandwidth costs. It isn't about bringing a site down (it's specifically designed against that) but instead to increase their cost of doing business. [Yes, I know they have problems with their buggy throttling, but that will work itself out quickly.]
For the moment, it does seem to be correctly targeting companies that employ spamhauses. I also agree that this particular genie is out of the bottle. For now at least, the targets are crystal clear, thanks to spamcop. And actually, a e-mail client plug-in probably *is* a better solution in that the retaliation is more directly proportional to the amount of spam sent.
I can only hope that some major business-oriented publishers start touting stories of total financial ruin as a result of using spam for business on the internet. Once spam is eradicated, we can target pop-up advertisers, hell ALL advertisers next.
Maybe this is the start of a Really Good Thing(tm). Time will tell.
Slashdot Mirror
So, the free and open source solution has won a competition. Is the point now to somehow compel Diebold to seriously consider actually using this open source solution?
While there is some truth in that, I clearly was /.ing for years before I got sucked into wiki. Sorry it took me so long to notice your reply...I was...over there.
While it is true that this happens on a regular basis, admins and regular contributors revert such edits very quickly on average. I know I spend a lot more time these days watching [[Special:Recentchanges]] than I do reading slashdot. I'd almost forgotten I had an account here.
Hmmm, I usually use "wiki:" or "+wiki". ~~~~
Clue me please: how does one tell (on a running system, long after power on self test) that a DIMM has gone faulty?
Languages get more complex over time, not less complicated.
*Especially* when there is no authority dictating what is right or wrong about a particular language.
Conversely, I think it's sad that microsoft started out NOT being transparent, and that it's taken them over twenty years to get that clue.
I do agree that this is an encouraging trend. But they still have an incredibly long way to go.
What newssource of yours does "respect the truth?" Not even our venerable /. can make that outrageous a claim.
BTW, I think it's (not "its") "Chicken Shit" of you to post A.C...
Either VistA or OpenVistA.
The US Department of Vetern Affairs created VistA for it's hospitals. It includes an elaborate physician scheduling package. It is in the public domain. The CPRS component provides a GUI view that many physicians and most clerks like.
OpenVistA is a commerialized flavor of the public domain software, which you can have installed and maintained from companies such as Medsphere.
Alek,
You went to great pain and expense to slander the internet in the eyes of the computer-phobic media. Congratulations. I hope you someday grow a conscience, you filthy pigfucker.
I dunno if I'd like a moderation system applied to the articles themselves (or even sections of articles.)
/. moderation system would probably apply quite nicely to the Discussion posts about an article. In wiki* the discussions themselves are mutable though.
But a
Perhaps if article creators did "own" their articles...and only they (or admins) could modify existing articles, based on moderated discussion? Might be tricky to implement.
Then again, that seems to be slowly happening anyhow. As articles are vandalized and reverted now, they get "protected." That seems ultimately to have the same effect as a complicated moderation scheme might.
Dear iamnotacrook,
/. reference about tin-foil-hats, and you likely were not the only one. Perhaps you have encountered similar ineloquent responses to other posts you have made. I don't know.
I apologize for that age related barb. You are correct, that was excessive.
I note from your response, that you seems to be mistaking my post for someone else's. I have never repled to one of your posts before. Please note that ANYONE can reply to a post as "Anonymous Coward." You can too.
Please relax. Do not take the vitriolic slashdot posts personally - they truly are not. Judging by your fairly high UID, your account is relatively new. I assume that you are younger than the average slashdot (/.) reader. Your nic however, evokes the persona of Tricky Dick - Richard Nixon. That implies you are an older person, who certainly would understand the tin-foil-hat references.
I tried to make my post informative, as well humorous. You apparently didn't understand the very common
Regardless, I have no intention of inciting a flamewar. If you do, please direct your ire towards my journal.
Cool. How do I get one through airport security?
It's been a little over three years right? You don't remember the little story about the guy on the plane taken over by hostages calling home one last time (while the plane was low) and discovering the fate of some of the other planes?
"Uhh, I've got a plastic knife from my breakfast..."
Alegedly, the passengers mounted a concerted assault against the hijackers because of that information. That plane crashed in the middle of nowhere in Pennsylvania.
Banning cell phones on planes always was stupid.
IIRC, the San Diego RL tickets are almost $300.00.
Perhaps I need to clarify my post a little.
1) I do not street race.
2) I have never raced an automobile.
3) I think the street racing culture is insane.
4) I *OF COURSE* have many times also tried the lights in San Diego AT the speed limit, as well as 5MPH below, as well as 10MPH below. NOTHING works. On approach, certain lights will always turn red.
5) The San Diego typical traffic flow is 20-30MPH over the speed limit. Going only 5-15 MPH over the limit is dangerous (the DIFFERENCE is speed of moving vehicles is much more dangerous than simply going with the flow of normal moving heavy traffic.) I am very well aware that different regions have very different patterns - in San Diego, traffic moves regardless of arbitrary posted limits. In Oklahoma, the majority of drivers stay at the speed limit - a minority go as much as 5MPH over. When they visit California, they cause accidents.
6) The San Diego Union Tribune in the last few years (sorry, I recycled my dead-tree versions) had articles discussing some of the city engineers tactics wrt screwing up the lights. Sometimes to foil red-light-runners, sometimes to discourage street racing.
7) There are essentially *no* old timer-based lights in San Diego. Almost all have ambulance detectors, and a bunch have red light cameras.
8) Traffic lights are a significant revenue source for the city. RL Cameras make the revenue collection much easier, consistent, as well as (ultimately) cheaper. Roads are no safer, since it is now legal (or at least accepted) to run any OTHER red light in San Diego - if there's no camera it can be run - no self-respecting cop will ever lower themselves to doing the work that the robot/cameras do...they need only concern themselves with 'real' crime. (HA!)
9) Traffic lights in San Diego are used to keep cars OFF the highways - by pushing the bottleneck(s) to the side-streets, the highways (in theory) move. In practice, it doesn't work at all, but it's clear (from just a single morning's commute from Pacific Beach PB) that the purpose of the lights is to prevent optimum traffic flow.
In parts of San Diego, the traffic lights get completely fucked up at night time, in an attempt to reduce street racing.
Not sure if it's purely timing, or distance sensoring, but either way, it seems to work - that is, piss the shit out of someone like me driving *only* 5-10 MPH over speed limit. After 10PM, the lights turn red on approach no matter what speed you are going.
The memory makes me quite happy to not live there anymore!
His article specicily mentions 60 year olds. Methinks he's clever in targeting people old enough to be scared of death, but still have a nest egg ready for the latest snake-oil fountain-of-youth. I think my parents subscribe to Prevention (I think that's it, anyhow) the magazine dedicated to such cure-alls.
Agreed. Whatever disks he has in it will melt in the summertime. Maybe running the backup server only once a week when the outdoor temperature is over 50 deg. f.? My unattached garage had huge temperature fluctuations. And an occasional washing machine overflow.
Oh, don't get your undies in a twist over this - there's nothing untoward going on here.
<scary>The national press, including United Press International (UPI), were excluded from yesterday's event, at Mr. Tenet's request, organizers said.</scary>
Aw shucks, you found me out (or did you just take the painful time to go back through my older posts?)
/. comment here or there might possibly have a positive effect.
Yeah, I think the more appropriate response to 9/11 would have been nuclear retaliation. WTF are we doing today? Manufacturing martyrs. For each martyr, we in turn manufacture dozens to hundreds of new recruits for alQ. et al.
Do I then bemoan human rights violations? Well yeah, I do, considering we're attacking the wrong fucking target(s)!
The significant difference is that I can do nothing about the GWB led oil imperialism. But in the realm of internet etiquitte, a
Glad to have amused you. Gotta go now though - the voices are talking to me again, and I can hear them through my tinfoil hat, my tinfoil earplugs, and my tinfoil earmuffs.
Looking at that old goofy "Internet Traffic Report" (remember? - from back in the 1990s?) web site, I noticed something that seems significant.
http://www.internettrafficreport.com/7day.htm
There seems to have been a tremendous effect on overall web traffic recently. The 'recovery' period seems incredibly rapid however.
Anyone know how to gauge whether this had any real effect on total spam sent on the (whole) internet? Also, anyone know difinitively what the start/stop times of the "attack" were?
I know the spamhauses themselves were not targetted. Does this merely reflect a couple hundred thousand people smacking the root nameservers with obscure domain lookups? Or was the screensaver using explicit IP addresses?
Well, we'll have to wait and see how this all pans out. I wish I shared your optimism.
One minor nitpick though, the primary focus of this approach to increase the spamhaus' employers' bandwidth costs. It isn't about bringing a site down (it's specifically designed against that) but instead to increase their cost of doing business. [Yes, I know they have problems with their buggy throttling, but that will work itself out quickly.]
For the moment, it does seem to be correctly targeting companies that employ spamhauses. I also agree that this particular genie is out of the bottle. For now at least, the targets are crystal clear, thanks to spamcop. And actually, a e-mail client plug-in probably *is* a better solution in that the retaliation is more directly proportional to the amount of spam sent.
I can only hope that some major business-oriented publishers start touting stories of total financial ruin as a result of using spam for business on the internet. Once spam is eradicated, we can target pop-up advertisers, hell ALL advertisers next.
Maybe this is the start of a Really Good Thing(tm). Time will tell.
Thank you for your interesting response.
My (our?) USA legistators have already expressed and interest (CAN-SPAM act) in this arena. I share your opinion that they should not, but they do.
It scares me right through my tin-foil hat, it does.