I have to say, if I were to support mandrake any more (more than my $90 boxed distro) then I'd be in favour of buying more boxes in preference to a club subscription.
Think about it: for the same cost as a year in their club, you could have a couple of pretty shiny new boxed distributions you can give as presents, lend around at work, or post to anyone with a slow net connection.
Best of all, you get a load of web support included, so if you give a boxed distro to someone new to linux, they can have all the mandrake-handholding as they install it. (as opposed to just lending them your own CDs and supporting them yourself)
When my sis buys her PC, I was planning to lend my mandrake package to the PC shop and let them install it, but if Mandrake are losing out financially, or if support is really useful, I may just pay for another boxed set.
I seem to remember bloodshed dev C/C++ being very useful in my previous job (where programming windows wasn't the main aim of the job)
GCC would've been nice, but unfortunately it doesn't work in windows. ActivePerl is good, although GUIs are't the simplest things to create. Spreadsheets and VBA can get you a certain way, especially on simple tasks.
The best feature of bloodshed C is the look your manager gives you when you mention the name.
Hence the reason that encryption is only the first step.
Second step is steganography, hiding the message, either by attaching it to the end of a zip file, or by weaving it into an image.
Third step is to have an encryption system which allows alternate passwords: each password reveals a different set of data, and the password you get forced to tell someone reveals not much at all.
You need more than just encryption to hide your data from governments.
I think pretty much everyone who's played flight-simulators on their PC has had their share of skyscraper crashes... given that most games seem to be set in the San-Fransisco area too.
Was it JetFighter-II where you could take out as many tall buildings as you had missiles for, followed by flying under Golden Gate bridge and bombing Alcatraz?
Of course, you could play the nice sensible microsoft flight simulator, which has lame aircraft that can't survive building crashes!
Your suggested code will fail when I visit it on a JavaScript-enabled browser with JavaScript turned off.
Turning off javascript in IE5 is good. It means you don't get pop-up advertisements. However, it also means you don't get to see the text in <noscript> tags, because IE5 supports javascript.
(a) filtering: you type in "geocities.com" and you're given a page explaining "this area is used by porn archives, shitty personal sites, and random spam targets. Go away and find a real website to look at"
(b) monitoring: you can look at whatever you like, and then the list of URLs you view is printed and displayed on a noticeboard. People laugh at your obscure sexual preferences.
Yes, there's a speed limit on the road. It's 300 million metres per second, and it's physically impossible to go faster. This is case (a)
Case (b) says "we'll put a GPS in your car and radio the police with your speed" - you're given the opportunity to go faster, and to explain yourself later. For example, a police car might choose to go faster with the defence that they have special provision.
Case (a) is like spikes that pop-up in front of fast cars. No matter how good your reason, the spikes won't listen.
Surely it's more useful to teach children to be utter cynics, to laugh in the face of advertisements, to run netscape with javascript and animations turned off, to mute their TVs or make tea when adverts come on, to know what an email virus looks like and how to delete it, to know how to avoid pop-ups, porn redirects, and the like. To teach them life.
That said, for primary schools the internet will probably be more trouble than it's worth. Who needs to spend their time teaching, when you can spend that time trying to get a Windows/IE/Outlook/Internet computer to keep working?
They should just get BBC-B's like my primary school, and give each kid an audio tape to save their programs on!
Exactly. There is nothing in this treaty around which I could conveivably create a letter of complaint to an MP.
It doesn't outlaw encryption research, like dmca, it doesn't outlaw devices just because the record industry doesn't like them, it doesn't prevent fair use (UK: backup copies of CDs, copying by librarians, charities, schools, clubs, courts, government) and it certainly doesn't outlaw open-source software (like scssa)
So what's the problem? The only problem is that US senators (either those who are bribed or those who don't know any better) can use it as an excuse to pass more restrictive laws, citing "we have to comply with this treaty"
So the problem isn't the WPA treaty, it's the fact that senators' wages are paid by hollywood.
Did I not see a colour detector as part of the LegoMindstorms set, or does that require one digital camera for each pool pocket?
If you're using red/yellow balls, plus white cueball and black 8-ball, you should be able to detect all of those using 2 light-sensors, a red filter, and a yellow filter.
Of course, you can just play pool at games.yahoo.com if you really need the bounce-angles calculated and displayed on the table
Exactly. Copyright is not "limited" if a 20-year extension is granted every 20 years. As any mathmatician will tell you, this is "unlimited" control over works.
So in the last century, copyright was lengthened from 14 years to ~100-150 years. That sounds awfully like perpetuity to me.
This is not about stealing music!!! We want to see books preserved, books written by authors who would be appalled to hear that we are awaiting their (long dead) permission before we prevent their work from being lost forever.
"Copyrights last 70 years after your death. This means that your great-grandchildren will be able to profit from your work, work which they had no part in, neither did their parents, neither did their grandparents. Can somebody please explain why this isn't long enough?"
I'm all for 14-year copyright. If somebody wants to copy work written when I was 8, then I'm sure as hell not interested in selling the word-processor for a TRS-80, or an XOR encryption program for the BBC micro, even if you could retrieve them from the audio tapes on which they were saved.
Think about what you're working on now. Are you seriously expecting to still be selling it in 2016? (In an unmodified form, each later version gets it's own copyright) No? So why choose to copyright it until 2120 then?
Of course, the estimate of my lifetime may be a few years out, but after I die, I'd probably be quite happy if people were still interested in the programs I'm writing now!
If you setup SMTP servers to only allow messages which are delivered to less than 3 people (reasonable, since the SMTP server pays for the bandwidth used) then as you say, the spammer could simply send a million messages to one person each.
The difference between this, and sending one message with a million "CC" addresses is that the spammer would have to pay for the same amount of bandwidth as the SMTP server does.
Of course, the unsecured mail server is still screwed for bandwidth, but remember that the internet has been upgraded many times to cope with the 50%-of-emails-are-spam situation, so they should cope.
And the spammer's costs increase linearly with the number of recipients.
Trusted certificate authorities generally charge £20 per year for any sort of certificate/service. Anyone trying to use Outlook Express' encryption will find that it costs money.
Most people don't want to pay £20 per year for an electronic signature. That's why they use GPG or PGP. Of course, this is a peer-to-peer system, and has no "central trusted person"
If email required the use of certificates generated by some monopoly company free to charge what they like, many people will confuse these signed certificates with encryption keys, and it could well delay the common adoption of email encryption, which is A Bad Thing (tm)
Of course, if personal certificates "ought to be free", you're welcome to spend your time checking national insurance numbers and postcodes, signing people's certificates, and revoking them each time they get stolen by a spammer.
The programs I'm working on go something like this: Any email from a new address is replied to with "Please send this password to appear in the whitelist"
Anything not (a) from the whitelist or (b) containing the password is not downloaded from the server.
Of course, my ISP still has to pay the cost of spam, but at least I don't have to spend hours on a modem downloading the shit.
Well then, they can publish their email on a website and their 10,000 people can bookmark it.
I can't seriously believe that anyone would sign up to a mailing list with 100 emails per day - the emails must arrive so fast that you wouldn't be able to do anything else.
Just cos it has the "linux" name, doesn't mean they get special permission to send a million emails per day for free. It means they need a better system to disseminate their information.
Slashdot Mirror
The definition of a charity (as used by governments etc) is
"a voluntary-supported organisation which exists for the benefit of a whole community"
Now, you don't -have- to support mandrake, but if you do so, it's for the benefit of the whole computer-user community.
Yes, they're a business. Yes, they look like a charity. No problem
I have to say, if I were to support mandrake any more (more than my $90 boxed distro) then I'd be in favour of buying more boxes in preference to a club subscription.
Think about it: for the same cost as a year in their club, you could have a couple of pretty shiny new boxed distributions you can give as presents, lend around at work, or post to anyone with a slow net connection.
Best of all, you get a load of web support included, so if you give a boxed distro to someone new to linux, they can have all the mandrake-handholding as they install it. (as opposed to just lending them your own CDs and supporting them yourself)
When my sis buys her PC, I was planning to lend my mandrake package to the PC shop and let them install it, but if Mandrake are losing out financially, or if support is really useful, I may just pay for another boxed set.
Okay, I've got to apple's quicktime download site--which one do I choose? Windows version or Macintosh version?
Anyone know how to play these things?
I seem to remember bloodshed dev C/C++ being very useful in my previous job (where programming windows wasn't the main aim of the job)
GCC would've been nice, but unfortunately it doesn't work in windows. ActivePerl is good, although GUIs are't the simplest things to create. Spreadsheets and VBA can get you a certain way, especially on simple tasks.
The best feature of bloodshed C is the look your manager gives you when you mention the name.
Hence the reason that encryption is only the first step.
Second step is steganography, hiding the message, either by attaching it to the end of a zip file, or by weaving it into an image.
Third step is to have an encryption system which allows alternate passwords: each password reveals a different set of data, and the password you get forced to tell someone reveals not much at all.
You need more than just encryption to hide your data from governments.
??? I hope GTA wasn't written by people using Macs, otherwise it'd be just too ironic.
Look ma, we "created" grand "theft" auto!
I think pretty much everyone who's played flight-simulators on their PC has had their share of skyscraper crashes... given that most games seem to be set in the San-Fransisco area too.
Was it JetFighter-II where you could take out as many tall buildings as you had missiles for, followed by flying under Golden Gate bridge and bombing Alcatraz?
Of course, you could play the nice sensible microsoft flight simulator, which has lame aircraft that can't survive building crashes!
Your suggested code will fail when I visit it on a JavaScript-enabled browser
with JavaScript turned off.
Turning off javascript in IE5 is good. It means you don't get pop-up advertisements.
However, it also means you don't get to see the text in <noscript>
tags, because IE5 supports javascript.
<script language="JavaScript">
<!--
window.location="My Javascript-enabled page";
//-->
</script>
<h1>Welcome to my text page</h1>
So the linux clipboard (or lack of compatibility thereof) provides enough reason for them to buy and use Windows/Office XP?
Sounds like a reason to fix the shitty broken clipboard, then. I'll be grateful when I can at last paste from KMail into Mozilla.
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate
Use linux, then you can become a communist, freeloading, anti-american terrorist too. Apparently.
The faster your internet connection, the more likely that a pop-up will finish loading and spawn 10 others before you can click on the X
I have dial-up, and if I'm unlucky enough to see a pop-up window, it generally hasn't got as far as loading the page title when I close it.
okay, you refer to the difference between:
(a) filtering: you type in "geocities.com" and you're given a page explaining "this area is used by porn archives, shitty personal sites, and random spam targets. Go away and find a real website to look at"
(b) monitoring: you can look at whatever you like, and then the list of URLs you view is printed and displayed on a noticeboard. People laugh at your obscure sexual preferences.
Yes, there's a speed limit on the road. It's 300 million metres per second, and it's physically impossible to go faster. This is case (a)
Case (b) says "we'll put a GPS in your car and radio the police with your speed" - you're given the opportunity to go faster, and to explain yourself later. For example, a police car might choose to go faster with the defence that they have special provision.
Case (a) is like spikes that pop-up in front of fast cars. No matter how good your reason, the spikes won't listen.
You say this just moments after the US announces that it will make all telecoms' equipment privately owned...
Censorship is okay if you travel through someone else's network, right?
Surely it's more useful to teach children to be utter cynics, to laugh in the face of advertisements, to run netscape with javascript and animations turned off, to mute their TVs or make tea when adverts come on, to know what an email virus looks like and how to delete it, to know how to avoid pop-ups, porn redirects, and the like. To teach them life.
That said, for primary schools the internet will probably be more trouble than it's worth. Who needs to spend their time teaching, when you can spend that time trying to get a Windows/IE/Outlook/Internet computer to keep working?
They should just get BBC-B's like my primary school, and give each kid an audio tape to save their programs on!
Exactly. There is nothing in this treaty around which I could conveivably create a letter of complaint to an MP.
It doesn't outlaw encryption research, like dmca, it doesn't outlaw devices just because the record industry doesn't like them, it doesn't prevent fair use (UK: backup copies of CDs, copying by librarians, charities, schools, clubs, courts, government) and it certainly doesn't outlaw open-source software (like scssa)
So what's the problem? The only problem is that US senators (either those who are bribed or those who don't know any better) can use it as an excuse to pass more restrictive laws, citing "we have to comply with this treaty"
So the problem isn't the WPA treaty, it's the fact that senators' wages are paid by hollywood.
Did I not see a colour detector as part of the LegoMindstorms set, or does that require one digital camera for each pool pocket?
If you're using red/yellow balls, plus white cueball and black 8-ball, you should be able to detect all of those using 2 light-sensors, a red filter, and a yellow filter.
Of course, you can just play pool at games.yahoo.com if you really need the bounce-angles calculated and displayed on the table
Exactly. Copyright is not "limited" if a 20-year extension is granted every 20 years. As any mathmatician will tell you, this is "unlimited" control over works.
So in the last century, copyright was lengthened from 14 years to ~100-150 years. That sounds awfully like perpetuity to me.
This is not about stealing music!!! We want to see books preserved, books written by authors who would be appalled to hear that we are awaiting their (long dead) permission before we prevent their work from being lost forever.
I think the best quote I heard on copyright was:
"Copyrights last 70 years after your death. This means that your great-grandchildren will be able to profit from your work, work which they had no part in, neither did their parents, neither did their grandparents. Can somebody please explain why this isn't long enough?"
I'm all for 14-year copyright. If somebody wants to copy work written when I was 8, then I'm sure as hell not interested in selling the word-processor for a TRS-80, or an XOR encryption program for the BBC micro, even if you could retrieve them from the audio tapes on which they were saved.
Think about what you're working on now. Are you seriously expecting to still be selling it in 2016? (In an unmodified form, each later version gets it's own copyright) No? So why choose to copyright it until 2120 then?
Of course, the estimate of my lifetime may be a few years out, but after I die, I'd probably be quite happy if people were still interested in the programs I'm writing now!
If you setup SMTP servers to only allow messages which are delivered to less than 3 people (reasonable, since the SMTP server pays for the bandwidth used) then as you say, the spammer could simply send a million messages to one person each.
The difference between this, and sending one message with a million "CC" addresses is that the spammer would have to pay for the same amount of bandwidth as the SMTP server does.
Of course, the unsecured mail server is still screwed for bandwidth, but remember that the internet has been upgraded many times to cope with the 50%-of-emails-are-spam situation, so they should cope.
And the spammer's costs increase linearly with the number of recipients.
Trusted certificate authorities generally charge £20 per year for any sort of certificate/service. Anyone trying to use Outlook Express' encryption will find that it costs money.
Most people don't want to pay £20 per year for an electronic signature. That's why they use GPG or PGP. Of course, this is a peer-to-peer system, and has no "central trusted person"
If email required the use of certificates generated by some monopoly company free to charge what they like, many people will confuse these signed certificates with encryption keys, and it could well delay the common adoption of email encryption, which is A Bad Thing (tm)
Of course, if personal certificates "ought to be free", you're welcome to spend your time checking national insurance numbers and postcodes, signing people's certificates, and revoking them each time they get stolen by a spammer.
Fair enough. Valid reply addresses.
The programs I'm working on go something like this: Any email from a new address is replied to with "Please send this password to appear in the whitelist"
Anything not (a) from the whitelist or (b) containing the password is not downloaded from the server.
Of course, my ISP still has to pay the cost of spam, but at least I don't have to spend hours on a modem downloading the shit.
Well then, they can publish their email on a website and their 10,000 people can bookmark it.
I can't seriously believe that anyone would sign up to a mailing list with 100 emails per day - the emails must arrive so fast that you wouldn't be able to do anything else.
Just cos it has the "linux" name, doesn't mean they get special permission to send a million emails per day for free. It means they need a better system to disseminate their information.
"Two people can keep a secret... but only if one of them is dead"