I've always liked the red set--Illinois, Kentucky, and that other one I don't recall off the top of my head. It seems to do me well.
Besides, the color is thematically appropriate for the chinese edition, where the Minister of Finance keeps a close eye on players who are too successful and do not bribe him sufficiently.;-p
Now that's a happy little situation right there. I'm glad the FCC just stated, flat-out, that telco operators wouldn't be able to pull that particular shenanigans with services like skype here.
Though really, it's not all that surprising. China's gone for home-grown 'equivalents' of popular overseas services for quite some time--look at their 'facebook' and their 'google' workalikes, all doubtless with more than enough spyware built into 'em to keep an eye on dissidents.
This particular user is one of the 'special people' who requires frequent and painstaking assistance whenever anything changes on the system.
I think that Mr. "I don't believe you" up there might be a little bit defensive on this matter, especially given the screed about how "non-technical" users are not lesser people;-p
This month's horror story concerns a user reporting a nasty security issue.
The user comes up to the helldesk and reports that they have a, quote, "mysterious cable" coming out the front of their computer. Given that at $company we pay a little more attention to security than, say, Gawker, one of my fellow Ops techs was dispatched to the user's desk to determine what this cable could be and why it was so mysterious.
A few minutes later, he returned, having successfully traced the mysterious cable out the front USB port all the way to the keyboard.
Upon reporting this finding, another tech asked who the user was--and then noted that she had given said keyboard to said user, who had plugged the keyboard into the USB port herself.
It would be an interesting sort of crowd-sourced protest, if a lot of aggrieved people bought abusive domains and pointed them at a protest site existing pretty much specifically to collect them.
Domain registrars would make a mint off of such a protest...and it would be much more 'socially acceptable' than your typical DDoSing.
First registrar to announce splitting the proceeds of such actions with, say, Child's Play or the Red Cross could gain instant credibility with a large segment of the abusive-domain-buying public.
Further, it would sap the banks' resources as their PR people frantically attempt to mitigate the consequences of the protests. Now that we know they'll preemptively buy domains, too, it provides interesting opportunities for cybersquatting...
There is a middle ground--not blocking ads on sites that don't have annoying intrusive advertisements.
That way, you punish the intrusive advertisement funded sites for their poor choice. Over time, they may learn their lesson.
I'm more than happy to allow ads that, for instance, don't cover up vast parts of the UI, aren't animated, don't play sounds, and don't suck my bandwidth with useless crap I have no desire for.
Text-based is nice, too. That way, I can actually get to the content, instead of having to wait 20 minutes for the browser to finish rendering fecking advertisements.
Seems fair--you verify it, you're responsible for it. Applies to everything, really.
The best part is that you can just buy a 'check card' from some vendor who -doesn't- have this policy, and use -that- to 'support piracy'. All MC's time and expense does is add one extra step.
#2, it's called professional ethics. Independent contractors have to have 'em, because their livelihood depends on their reputation. Corporate drones, less so--their 'reputations' hinge off the company's marketing.
#3, I accept cashier's checks and cash, myself. Only accept a personal check if you know the person and you can kneecap 'em if it bounces. Credit cards aren't really in the books for most independent contractors on the consumer-maintainence side.
(O'course, I try to -avoid- that side, myself; most of my contracting's done in other areas--but hey, if someone wants to pay me $60 to set up a printer and I have nothing else to do, I'm not about to turn it down, and at least when I do it I know it's done right).
Some of the plans sound like they want to bring back AOL, in essence--the walled garden of 'preferred' content, with, optionally, a pipe out to that "internet" place.
Why we didn't use "you don't want AOL back, do you?" as an argument for net neutrality before completely escapes me.
The WSJ has an impressively schizophrenic personality. The regular articles--the ones that you'd find on, say, the front page of the print edition--are very well researched and well-written, as well as impressively neutral in political alignment. They tend to stick strictly to the facts and use as little conjecture as possible.
The editorial page, however, is sometimes even further to the right than Glenn Beck. It is -RABIDLY- right-wing, sometimes getting close to fascism. It's probably what the Fox News people point to when they try to claim that their coverage fair and balanced.
Whether or not you think the FCC's alleged power over internet connections is useful, legit, or otherwise constitutional, there -is- a new influence that we can now bring to bear against people trying to disrupt the structure of the internet, e.g. Comcast v. L3:
The FCC has shown itself to be vulnerable to PTC-style interventions, where a large segment of organized users more-or-less simultaneously demands intervention against a regulated entity--see nipplegate for details.
A PTC-like organization of interested internet users (Hey, Anonymous--you guys reading this?) could force the FCC to levy fines against ISPs that engaged in activities that contravene usability of the internet for various users.
What we have here is an opportunity. Sure, the whole structure is not perfect, but that can be changed. Let's -use- this opportunity.
Well, to spend would require passing the token (read: handing over the bill) to the new owner.
Key generation by private individuals could be prevented through custom exotic machine architecture without which the algorithms don't work--say, quantum-processed base-(largeprime) calculations. It wouldn't last forever, of course; doubtless, someone would be able to eventually crack the base-2305843009213693951 calculations that generate the keys, but by that time the new series of bills would be out;-p
If it became necessary to inflate the bitcoin supply, issuing a new series based on the same algorithm would be more than possible, by the looks of it. O'course, calibrating the exchange rate between bitcoin.v.1 and bitcoin.v.2 would be a fun exercise in applied economic theory...
Or, alternatively, the bitcoins are technically divisible by several places more than is currently supported. Updating the clients for one more decimal place gives you more options.
Now here's an interesting thought--bear with me here--what if the serial number were generated as the public key to a private key hidden in the electronics in the note? That way, the authenticity could be verified easily, and, as a bonus, individual bills could be used as crypto keys.
Considering that the rules apply only to exams taken by middle and high school students, by then, spelling should be less of a concern than content, structure, and adherence to the theme given for the writing. Spellcheck is a tool that they'll be using for 'real life' implementation of the skills being tested, so it seems fairly reasonable to allow them its use.
I think that Google Docs, for better or for worse, will end up having a bigger impact than OpenOffice (or any forks thereof): it comes from a recognizeable 'brand name' and it's got an interface that people are reasonably familiar with. It also "just works"--nothing to install or configure or whatnot.
When it comes down to the end user, that's going to be one of the biggest criteria for what platform to adopt--and if it were a choice between google docs and MS Office, most people I know would pick the cheaper and easier option.
Besides, MS doesn't package Office with Windows--but they do package 'the internet'.
...on what large account threatened to go to OpenOffice if Microsoft kept nagging 'em?
More seriously (because I know how enterprise licensing works, and I know that an enterprise account was not likely the reason behind this) I dare say that the program simply wasn't profitable--that people either cracked the program to stop nagging 'em if they pirated it, or went to some competitor. No profits = no use nagging.
By rolling the text into the illustrations, AFAIK.
Epub is an XML derivative, I think, so if you want a particular layout you'll have to keep that in mind--and the only way to ensure that is to make the book a series of pictures.
I've been looking into small-scale publishing, so I actually have an answer for this:
Nope.
Kindle accepts.mobi, but the spiffy Amazon features are a little bit locked down for outsiders.
nook and most everybody else will accept epub, though. Smashwords has some interesting agreements with ebook retailers, where they will submit your book to several different outlets for a (rather reasonable) cut of the sales.
Once I finish editing my book, I think I may well go with them.
Slashdot Mirror
I've always liked the red set--Illinois, Kentucky, and that other one I don't recall off the top of my head. It seems to do me well.
;-p
Besides, the color is thematically appropriate for the chinese edition, where the Minister of Finance keeps a close eye on players who are too successful and do not bribe him sufficiently.
Now that's a happy little situation right there. I'm glad the FCC just stated, flat-out, that telco operators wouldn't be able to pull that particular shenanigans with services like skype here.
Though really, it's not all that surprising. China's gone for home-grown 'equivalents' of popular overseas services for quite some time--look at their 'facebook' and their 'google' workalikes, all doubtless with more than enough spyware built into 'em to keep an eye on dissidents.
Yep, you've got it.
;-p
This particular user is one of the 'special people' who requires frequent and painstaking assistance whenever anything changes on the system.
I think that Mr. "I don't believe you" up there might be a little bit defensive on this matter, especially given the screed about how "non-technical" users are not lesser people
This month's horror story concerns a user reporting a nasty security issue.
The user comes up to the helldesk and reports that they have a, quote, "mysterious cable" coming out the front of their computer. Given that at $company we pay a little more attention to security than, say, Gawker, one of my fellow Ops techs was dispatched to the user's desk to determine what this cable could be and why it was so mysterious.
A few minutes later, he returned, having successfully traced the mysterious cable out the front USB port all the way to the keyboard.
Upon reporting this finding, another tech asked who the user was--and then noted that she had given said keyboard to said user, who had plugged the keyboard into the USB port herself.
It would be an interesting sort of crowd-sourced protest, if a lot of aggrieved people bought abusive domains and pointed them at a protest site existing pretty much specifically to collect them.
Domain registrars would make a mint off of such a protest...and it would be much more 'socially acceptable' than your typical DDoSing.
First registrar to announce splitting the proceeds of such actions with, say, Child's Play or the Red Cross could gain instant credibility with a large segment of the abusive-domain-buying public.
Further, it would sap the banks' resources as their PR people frantically attempt to mitigate the consequences of the protests. Now that we know they'll preemptively buy domains, too, it provides interesting opportunities for cybersquatting...
There is a middle ground--not blocking ads on sites that don't have annoying intrusive advertisements.
That way, you punish the intrusive advertisement funded sites for their poor choice. Over time, they may learn their lesson.
I'm more than happy to allow ads that, for instance, don't cover up vast parts of the UI, aren't animated, don't play sounds, and don't suck my bandwidth with useless crap I have no desire for.
Text-based is nice, too. That way, I can actually get to the content, instead of having to wait 20 minutes for the browser to finish rendering fecking advertisements.
Seems fair--you verify it, you're responsible for it. Applies to everything, really.
The best part is that you can just buy a 'check card' from some vendor who -doesn't- have this policy, and use -that- to 'support piracy'. All MC's time and expense does is add one extra step.
It's always been that way, even back before they got bought out.
(Disclaimer: I learned to read with the WSJ. YARLY. Grandparents had a subscription.)
#1, read the news. It's been prosecuted before.
#2, it's called professional ethics. Independent contractors have to have 'em, because their livelihood depends on their reputation. Corporate drones, less so--their 'reputations' hinge off the company's marketing.
#3, I accept cashier's checks and cash, myself. Only accept a personal check if you know the person and you can kneecap 'em if it bounces. Credit cards aren't really in the books for most independent contractors on the consumer-maintainence side.
(O'course, I try to -avoid- that side, myself; most of my contracting's done in other areas--but hey, if someone wants to pay me $60 to set up a printer and I have nothing else to do, I'm not about to turn it down, and at least when I do it I know it's done right).
Well, that's what competition's about, ain't it?
If you can't provide the services that I demand at the price point I demand 'em, I'll go to someone else who can.
Progress happens. Keep up with the times, or die. That's how the world works.
(Hey, how's your buggy-whip business doing?)
Some of the plans sound like they want to bring back AOL, in essence--the walled garden of 'preferred' content, with, optionally, a pipe out to that "internet" place.
Why we didn't use "you don't want AOL back, do you?" as an argument for net neutrality before completely escapes me.
The WSJ has an impressively schizophrenic personality. The regular articles--the ones that you'd find on, say, the front page of the print edition--are very well researched and well-written, as well as impressively neutral in political alignment. They tend to stick strictly to the facts and use as little conjecture as possible.
The editorial page, however, is sometimes even further to the right than Glenn Beck. It is -RABIDLY- right-wing, sometimes getting close to fascism. It's probably what the Fox News people point to when they try to claim that their coverage fair and balanced.
Whether or not you think the FCC's alleged power over internet connections is useful, legit, or otherwise constitutional, there -is- a new influence that we can now bring to bear against people trying to disrupt the structure of the internet, e.g. Comcast v. L3:
The FCC has shown itself to be vulnerable to PTC-style interventions, where a large segment of organized users more-or-less simultaneously demands intervention against a regulated entity--see nipplegate for details.
A PTC-like organization of interested internet users (Hey, Anonymous--you guys reading this?) could force the FCC to levy fines against ISPs that engaged in activities that contravene usability of the internet for various users.
What we have here is an opportunity. Sure, the whole structure is not perfect, but that can be changed. Let's -use- this opportunity.
Well, to spend would require passing the token (read: handing over the bill) to the new owner.
;-p
Key generation by private individuals could be prevented through custom exotic machine architecture without which the algorithms don't work--say, quantum-processed base-(largeprime) calculations. It wouldn't last forever, of course; doubtless, someone would be able to eventually crack the base-2305843009213693951 calculations that generate the keys, but by that time the new series of bills would be out
If it became necessary to inflate the bitcoin supply, issuing a new series based on the same algorithm would be more than possible, by the looks of it. O'course, calibrating the exchange rate between bitcoin.v.1 and bitcoin.v.2 would be a fun exercise in applied economic theory...
Or, alternatively, the bitcoins are technically divisible by several places more than is currently supported. Updating the clients for one more decimal place gives you more options.
A more effective way would be for the NSA to run the client on its server farms for a few days, and amass a controlling interest in the concern ;-p
Now here's an interesting thought--bear with me here--what if the serial number were generated as the public key to a private key hidden in the electronics in the note? That way, the authenticity could be verified easily, and, as a bonus, individual bills could be used as crypto keys.
That would likely be why they want to deposit so many of them--so that if they wear or wash off, there will still be enough of 'em to work.
You've not seen txtspeak before, then?
Considering that the rules apply only to exams taken by middle and high school students, by then, spelling should be less of a concern than content, structure, and adherence to the theme given for the writing. Spellcheck is a tool that they'll be using for 'real life' implementation of the skills being tested, so it seems fairly reasonable to allow them its use.
I don't have $149, and am neither a student nor Canadian.
I'll stick with a competing product that works and costs less, thank you.
I think that Google Docs, for better or for worse, will end up having a bigger impact than OpenOffice (or any forks thereof): it comes from a recognizeable 'brand name' and it's got an interface that people are reasonably familiar with. It also "just works"--nothing to install or configure or whatnot.
When it comes down to the end user, that's going to be one of the biggest criteria for what platform to adopt--and if it were a choice between google docs and MS Office, most people I know would pick the cheaper and easier option.
Besides, MS doesn't package Office with Windows--but they do package 'the internet'.
...on what large account threatened to go to OpenOffice if Microsoft kept nagging 'em?
More seriously (because I know how enterprise licensing works, and I know that an enterprise account was not likely the reason behind this) I dare say that the program simply wasn't profitable--that people either cracked the program to stop nagging 'em if they pirated it, or went to some competitor. No profits = no use nagging.
By rolling the text into the illustrations, AFAIK.
Epub is an XML derivative, I think, so if you want a particular layout you'll have to keep that in mind--and the only way to ensure that is to make the book a series of pictures.
I've been looking into small-scale publishing, so I actually have an answer for this:
.mobi, but the spiffy Amazon features are a little bit locked down for outsiders.
Nope.
Kindle accepts
nook and most everybody else will accept epub, though. Smashwords has some interesting agreements with ebook retailers, where they will submit your book to several different outlets for a (rather reasonable) cut of the sales.
Once I finish editing my book, I think I may well go with them.