I think this makes sense where your organization cannot devote additional resources. However it's important to work out how much staff time is wasted by your spam volume.
Personally I would reject if the sending server lacked a PTR record, or if the PTR record was invalid, or on SPF failure. I use templates to quickly reply where someone had trouble contacting us, directing them to contact their IT department and referencing RFCs where necessary. Even large ISPs would get it wrong sometimes, but invariably folk got it fixed within a day or so.
Almost no spam got through, so there are security gains and productivity gains. I found that to be worthwhile, but it will differ for every organization.
A bit more searching brings up this article which has an image of them incorporated into more 'normal' looking glasses. So it might be possible to use them in conjunction with your regular eyewear.
There are images of Sergey Brin wearing them outdoors while attached to sunglasses. Looking at the design I don't think you'd wear them over prescription glasses, but rather would get prescription lenses for the existing frame.
It's certainly not where I am in Virginia, nor in any location I have lived or my immediate family live. The FCC ruled almost eight years ago that local providers no longer have to share their lines with third parties, unlike in the UK where BT are required to make available the last mile connection.
As a result, my family in the UK, even those who live in tiny villages, have access to a multitude of ISPs. Here, in a decent sized US city, I have a choice of two providers.
From my personal experience, I don't think the two countries are in any way comparable.
I guess you've never purchased broadband in both countries.
Broadband in the US is expensive, slow and non-competitive by comparison. Customer service is astonishingly poor if you compare to a decent UK provider like Zen or A&A.
Most US homes will have a choice of one or two providers. DSL from the phone company and cable.
Virgin Media say they should have ipv6 running before they run out of addresses. Other ISPs offer ipv6 today and are available to anyone with broadband via a BT land line.
I'd have to imagine the percentage of UK homes that have internet access they would care about but who cannot get it via either BT or Virgin Media is very small.
I'd imagine the situation could be much worse in other countries like the US where homes often have a choice of just one or two providers.
My bank has public facing computers. If I were to find and exploit a way to access other people's banking data, I'm pretty sure there'd be hell to pay.
I'm pretty sure the US and UK both have laws that would prevent access beyond your authorization. I'd be astonished if Canada did not have similar legislation.
Businesses moving, you are kidding, right? You really think a business would move to a different country with a different regulatory environment rather than buy ipv4 addresses elsewhere and proxy/vpn etc if they really had the need for ipv4 addresses. If you think they'd move overseas, leaving most their workforce behind, leaving their funding sources and customer base, I think you're living on another planet.
What I see is less than 11% of the thousand most popular sites has adopted IPv6
I'd imagine the hundred most popular sites account for the vast majority of internet traffic. So it really depends where in the list of 1,000 sites that 11% is. I wonder if folk would feel differently if the ISP in question were to offer an unrestricted ipv6 connection or NAT based ipv4 at the customer's choice?
If a country the size of the UK were to set a switchover date and move to ipv6, the vast majority of English language sites would be running ipv6 by the switchover date for fear of losing that audience. It might take regulation though, as no ISP wants to be first for fear of losing customers.
I also know that you would have a lot more support from the gun owners of America.
You're kidding right? You think the NRA would let the government invade people's homes? There's be a barrage of constitutional challenges to any such law, however well-intentioned.
The reason this hasn't been proposed is because there's not a snowball's chance in hell of it being adopted.
The minimum an employer can offer in the UK would be 20 days vacation plus eight public holidays. That's almost six weeks. Most large employers that I have encountered will offer five weeks plus eight days public holidays, so almost three weeks extra per year. My last employer offered six weeks plus 9 days.
Large employers tend to also have generous sick leave. My previous employer paid full salary for six months then half salary for the following six months. Again, I don't think that would be unusual from a large employer. Perhaps shorter for the first couple of years of employment.
The standard working week is 35 hours, as opposed to the 40 hours that appears to be standard in the US.
Right now I have about 120hrs sick time and about 240hrs vacation time accrued
So, after ten years, you have three weeks sick time. If you're in a car accident, get diagnosed with a serious illness or similar then you need to hope you have private insurance?
You have six weeks vacation time accrued. That would not be an uncommon annual amount with a decent European employer. In the UK, the minimum annual entitlement is four weeks. Eight days of public holidays would be in addittion to that. I notice some US employers require their staff to take vacation on public holidays like Christmas or New Years when they couldn't work even if they wanted to.
THe BBC article also says Scottish life expectancy increased by seven years over the previous three decades. In the US, that increase was only 4.5 years. That would suggest Scotland has overtaken the United States in that period and is now pulling away. Here's historical US data.
well given that the band in question is a bunch of cool folks
Cool as they may be, I was still using the name before they formed the band. If it were not a generic word, I think they'd be the ones with a problem.
It is, however, generic and besides, I'm an easy going guy who is happy to share. Also, if you'd ever heard me play, you'd understand there's no risk of confusion with the band.
What would they be defending it against? It was used in the proper context to refer to the item they are selling.
If Timothy had talked about a range of lights from multiple manufacturers as all being 'good night lamps ' then there would be devaluation of the trade mark. Similarly if he had turned it into a verb, saying "I'll good-night-lamp when I go to sleep, so don;t call if the light is off" then there might also be devaluation.
I'm at a loss, however, to see what you think is being devalued here and would therefore need the company to instruct their attorneys to send a letter.
That said, I'm not a lawyer. If you are, I'd love to know your reasoning based on actual statutes or case histories.
Sorry, I wasn't clear in the point I was making and you misinterpret me as a result.
Many things will have single points of failure (though that could be a server farm, or a cloud provider like Amazon). My point was that if you want to provide a service that is expected to be reliable and available 24x7 by users, you need to be prepared for that and mitigate to the fullest extent possible.
It sounded like the OP wants to set up a single instance serving perhaps SIP or XMPP. I'd just want them to be aware that that is going to need maintenance and could have other forced downtime, and folk don't like that, especially with anything that's supposed to be instant. They should at the very least be considering failover options at the outset, rather than when it's actually needed.
I am looking to build a Skype replacement for me and some friends and was wondering which languages you would use server side to handle all of the encrypted data streaming? I am thinking to use SIP on a centralized server (as NAT can be a pain to get through). The clients will use end-to-end encryption. Thoughts?
Was this not what Jabber/XMPP was supposed to achieve over a decade ago?
I'd start by looking there. A centralized server is also a single point of failure. Something that tends to be frowned upon by users looking to chat by voice/video/text.
Which is irrelevant from a legal perspective. If you don't protect your copyright (intellectual property), then you lose it. It can legally become public domain then -- not that such a thing has ever happened in our twisted and convoluted legal system, but in principle it could.
Under what principle can you lose your copyright by not defending/enforcing it?
I think you might be thinking of trademarks. Trademarks and copyright are very very different.
Based on the data, it appears that the mandatory flu vaccine has more to do with the business side of the hospital than with the patient care.
You mean based upon your data. The CDC reports that compliance with hand washing runs around 40%. So while it may be as effective as vaccination, its effectiveness is directly limited by compliance rates.
So if the hospital is concerned about flu transmission, particularly to the young, elderly and immunocompromised for whom flu could be fatal, what is the most effective way to reduce transmission?
Proper hand hygiene should, of course, be in place in a hospital. But, despite years and years of effort, it still presents a problem. While that is the case, requiring a vaccination seems pretty reasonable for anyone who is patient facing and who does not have a documented medical condition that would make them an unsuitable candidate for the flu vaccine.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this makes sense where your organization cannot devote additional resources. However it's important to work out how much staff time is wasted by your spam volume.
Personally I would reject if the sending server lacked a PTR record, or if the PTR record was invalid, or on SPF failure. I use templates to quickly reply where someone had trouble contacting us, directing them to contact their IT department and referencing RFCs where necessary. Even large ISPs would get it wrong sometimes, but invariably folk got it fixed within a day or so.
Almost no spam got through, so there are security gains and productivity gains. I found that to be worthwhile, but it will differ for every organization.
A bit more searching brings up this article which has an image of them incorporated into more 'normal' looking glasses. So it might be possible to use them in conjunction with your regular eyewear.
There are images of Sergey Brin wearing them outdoors while attached to sunglasses. Looking at the design I don't think you'd wear them over prescription glasses, but rather would get prescription lenses for the existing frame.
It's certainly not where I am in Virginia, nor in any location I have lived or my immediate family live. The FCC ruled almost eight years ago that local providers no longer have to share their lines with third parties, unlike in the UK where BT are required to make available the last mile connection.
As a result, my family in the UK, even those who live in tiny villages, have access to a multitude of ISPs. Here, in a decent sized US city, I have a choice of two providers.
From my personal experience, I don't think the two countries are in any way comparable.
I guess you've never purchased broadband in both countries.
Broadband in the US is expensive, slow and non-competitive by comparison. Customer service is astonishingly poor if you compare to a decent UK provider like Zen or A&A.
Most US homes will have a choice of one or two providers. DSL from the phone company and cable.
Which areas?
Virgin Media say they should have ipv6 running before they run out of addresses. Other ISPs offer ipv6 today and are available to anyone with broadband via a BT land line.
I'd have to imagine the percentage of UK homes that have internet access they would care about but who cannot get it via either BT or Virgin Media is very small.
I'd imagine the situation could be much worse in other countries like the US where homes often have a choice of just one or two providers.
My bank has public facing computers. If I were to find and exploit a way to access other people's banking data, I'm pretty sure there'd be hell to pay.
I'm pretty sure the US and UK both have laws that would prevent access beyond your authorization. I'd be astonished if Canada did not have similar legislation.
Then you're not the target market. For the vast majority, I'm will to guess the providers will have better backup procedures than most homes.
Businesses moving, you are kidding, right? You really think a business would move to a different country with a different regulatory environment rather than buy ipv4 addresses elsewhere and proxy/vpn etc if they really had the need for ipv4 addresses. If you think they'd move overseas, leaving most their workforce behind, leaving their funding sources and customer base, I think you're living on another planet.
You seriously think this? Between 1980 and 1988, blunt instruments were responsible for about 6% of murders. Guns were responsible for about 60%.
I think you're well aware that's a completely different argument and, frankly, one that trivializes the issue we're talking about.
I'd imagine the hundred most popular sites account for the vast majority of internet traffic. So it really depends where in the list of 1,000 sites that 11% is. I wonder if folk would feel differently if the ISP in question were to offer an unrestricted ipv6 connection or NAT based ipv4 at the customer's choice?
If a country the size of the UK were to set a switchover date and move to ipv6, the vast majority of English language sites would be running ipv6 by the switchover date for fear of losing that audience. It might take regulation though, as no ISP wants to be first for fear of losing customers.
I'm struggling to think of many potentially dangerous tools that would compare to a gun in its portability and deadliness.
Five weeks ago, Nancy Lanza probably considered herself a responsible AR-15 owner. After all, she owned the weapons to defend her and her family.
The problem is the difficulty in establishing who is an irresponsible owner until after the fact.
You're kidding right? You think the NRA would let the government invade people's homes? There's be a barrage of constitutional challenges to any such law, however well-intentioned.
The reason this hasn't been proposed is because there's not a snowball's chance in hell of it being adopted.
The minimum an employer can offer in the UK would be 20 days vacation plus eight public holidays. That's almost six weeks. Most large employers that I have encountered will offer five weeks plus eight days public holidays, so almost three weeks extra per year. My last employer offered six weeks plus 9 days.
Large employers tend to also have generous sick leave. My previous employer paid full salary for six months then half salary for the following six months. Again, I don't think that would be unusual from a large employer. Perhaps shorter for the first couple of years of employment.
The standard working week is 35 hours, as opposed to the 40 hours that appears to be standard in the US.
All in all, I'd say it's pretty different.
So, after ten years, you have three weeks sick time. If you're in a car accident, get diagnosed with a serious illness or similar then you need to hope you have private insurance?
You have six weeks vacation time accrued. That would not be an uncommon annual amount with a decent European employer. In the UK, the minimum annual entitlement is four weeks. Eight days of public holidays would be in addittion to that. I notice some US employers require their staff to take vacation on public holidays like Christmas or New Years when they couldn't work even if they wanted to.
THe BBC article also says Scottish life expectancy increased by seven years over the previous three decades. In the US, that increase was only 4.5 years. That would suggest Scotland has overtaken the United States in that period and is now pulling away. Here's historical US data.
Cool as they may be, I was still using the name before they formed the band. If it were not a generic word, I think they'd be the ones with a problem.
It is, however, generic and besides, I'm an easy going guy who is happy to share. Also, if you'd ever heard me play, you'd understand there's no risk of confusion with the band.
Go there, who does that these days? Click street view and read what the sign above the door says.
What would they be defending it against? It was used in the proper context to refer to the item they are selling.
If Timothy had talked about a range of lights from multiple manufacturers as all being 'good night lamps ' then there would be devaluation of the trade mark. Similarly if he had turned it into a verb, saying "I'll good-night-lamp when I go to sleep, so don;t call if the light is off" then there might also be devaluation.
I'm at a loss, however, to see what you think is being devalued here and would therefore need the company to instruct their attorneys to send a letter.
That said, I'm not a lawyer. If you are, I'd love to know your reasoning based on actual statutes or case histories.
Sorry, I wasn't clear in the point I was making and you misinterpret me as a result.
Many things will have single points of failure (though that could be a server farm, or a cloud provider like Amazon). My point was that if you want to provide a service that is expected to be reliable and available 24x7 by users, you need to be prepared for that and mitigate to the fullest extent possible.
It sounded like the OP wants to set up a single instance serving perhaps SIP or XMPP. I'd just want them to be aware that that is going to need maintenance and could have other forced downtime, and folk don't like that, especially with anything that's supposed to be instant. They should at the very least be considering failover options at the outset, rather than when it's actually needed.
Was this not what Jabber/XMPP was supposed to achieve over a decade ago?
I'd start by looking there. A centralized server is also a single point of failure. Something that tends to be frowned upon by users looking to chat by voice/video/text.
Under what principle can you lose your copyright by not defending/enforcing it?
I think you might be thinking of trademarks. Trademarks and copyright are very very different.
You mean based upon your data. The CDC reports that compliance with hand washing runs around 40%. So while it may be as effective as vaccination, its effectiveness is directly limited by compliance rates.
So if the hospital is concerned about flu transmission, particularly to the young, elderly and immunocompromised for whom flu could be fatal, what is the most effective way to reduce transmission?
Proper hand hygiene should, of course, be in place in a hospital. But, despite years and years of effort, it still presents a problem. While that is the case, requiring a vaccination seems pretty reasonable for anyone who is patient facing and who does not have a documented medical condition that would make them an unsuitable candidate for the flu vaccine.