Why in God's name is this modded troll? Have we offended the slathering hordes of Java devotees? Lemme tell all of you something, when I was laid-off from a position, I went to interview with two shops, both with a heavy Java focus, and roughly equivalent in their focus, style, and clients. I didn't get a job with the first. But with the second, I was given some very good advice: Talk a lot about J2EE, Beans, and a bunch of other buzzwords, a few of which I had never heard of. "Doesn't matter if you don't know, man, just throw the words in. That's all they care about."
Got the job.
Java is so much about a culture and not a technology that it's disgusting. And it's a pity too, because all the PRINCIPLES of Java (portability through the VM, objectification, etc.) are so good that Microsoft took them to build.NET. (Don't start gnawing on me because I put "portability" and ".NET" in the same sentence - I was referring to the VM.)
Hell, I think Java is a great language. It concerns me that it takes seventeen steps to accomplish something as basic as opening a database connection, grabbing some results, and outputting them into an HTML stream (and seventeen may be generous). But, it's a very straightforward language, very teachable because it's so logical.
But too much of the culture is fluff. Why is it that Sun doesn't focus on point releases that improve performance but instead focuses on getin gthe newest buzzword, uh, "feature" out the door? Why did they invent something called Java2 which is, IIRC, just Java 1.3? Because they're more concerned about IMAGE than about getting their product - which is great in principle - in a usable state.
But let's talk substantively. I've developed large scale server-side applications in Java, C, C++, and - on the web-app side - PHP, Cold Fusion, and ASP.
The slowest of those was, almost without exception, Java. Java took the most coding to do a basic task, and Java was BY FAR the most difficult to package, deploy, and deliver to my customers. That's a real pity, because I was about 90% certain that our customer's architecture didn't really matter if we were playing with Java. Upgrading those old Dell NT servers to IBM? No problem. We'll just move the app over, and it should run without a hitch.
But, lord have mercy, it ran slowly.
To top it all off, here's some advice I received from a Java-guru at another company. I was griping about how slow Java was, and he said to me, "Oh, everybody knows it's slow. But why worry? Hardware's getting faster every day. True, 2ms is half the speed of 1ms, but who's gonna notice?"
I almost fell off my chair. It's that sort of laziness that makes my skin crawl.
Look, I love Java. I want it to succeed. It's a brilliant idea: an utterly cross-platform language whose apps run without regard to the hardware and OS under them.
But it's a seriously flawed masterpiece.
(The funny thing is, I was just going to write "Why was this modded troll? But then my post bloated... kinda like how you go to write "Hello World" in Java and... ok, ok, nevermind.)
It's tragic to watch the current fallout of the Columbia disaster. Certainly NASA, relevant manufacturers, and the United States Government will be asked to answer for any negligence which may have caused the loss of the shuttle and her seven crew. But I would implore anyone reading this not to conclude that the loss of the Columbia should mean the end of human spaceflight.
If anything, our commitment to space should be radically expanded. The current problems in the space program are the result of all power and authority over the development of space exploration being held in a single decision-making body. NASA, which is a marvelous organization and which certainly provided the basis for the early successes in space, is simply not equipped to move space exploration ahead. It is a government entity, unbound by market considerations, and weighed down by bureaucratic inefficiencies which make radical changes - such as the introduction of new technologies in a cost-effective manner - impossible.
The question, however, must be posed whether space exploration in itself is valuable enough to transfer to the private sector. This question is analogous to the gradual shift in the control of earthbound exploration schemes from sovereign control to chartered corporations. To answer the question, however, without respect to the analogy, no, space exploration in itself is not particularly valuable. It is another medium, another vehicle for transporting humans and their commerce, as well as seeing what's out there. I doubt any private venture at this point would find this to be a profitable scheme without, to be circular, some way to make profits from it.
Thus the analogy: space travel is valuable only insofar as it brings benefit to the people of this planet, or, more specifically, to the shareholders of any corporations which undertake it. In near space, the profits are easy to identify. The GPS system which allows boaters to find their way to fishing spots provided the "spiritual" basis for private venture such as XM Radio. Government-financed spy satellites showed private corporations that money could be made selling space-based imagery of the planet.
But none of these requires human space flight. In order for there to be profit in the human expansion into space, there must be some market for the products which can be produced exclusively or most efficiently in space, whether directly in the case of manufactured goods or indirectly in the case of products developed using experimental data acquired in space. As one discussion group poster noted in response to a question on the necessity of humans to supervise space-based experiments, "It's hard to count ants from 140 miles down."
The International Space Station is a fiasco, and so is the space shuttle. Given the radical developments in materials sciences and knowledge of the effects of space on human bodies, it is as unlikely that the shuttles would have remained in private service for twenty years as to consider that Boeing might continue to build aircraft using the processes and materials perfected during the development of, say, the now-obsolete 727. Even a plane that has had a 30-year lifespan such as the 737 is today not the same plane except in the most superficial way as the first model that flew out of Everett Field.
My plan for space would include the following broad steps. First, ground the shuttle fleet only as long as is necessary to conduct materials review of the launch equipment (fuel tank and rockets), the cooling tile system, and any particularly vulnerable areas of the shuttle's structure (particularly any structural elements on the bottom of the spacecraft). Second, apply any changes rapidly - within no more than two years - with a national commitment to redeploy the shuttle as a stopgap measure in the interests of national security and commerce (as well as prestige). Third, set a hard deadline to retire the shuttles by 2014 at the absolute latest - perhaps 2012 to coincide with the 50th anniversary of American spaceflight. Fourth, provide incentives to corporations to begin manned space flight outside the scope of NASA oversight. Fifth, turn NASA into a regulatory agency for the purposes of establishing safety guidelines; and a science agency which would fund and oversee pure science activities in space. Sixth, provide ongoing incentives for the next two or three decades to promote human exploitation of space by private corporations.
The money for such incentives could probably be found in the monies freed up by the unfortunate loss of Columbia. I would name two incentive packages: the Challenger Fund for the rapid commercialization of space exploration, and the Columbia Fund for the ongoing support of pure science exploration by government or commercial entities. A third package, the Apollo Fund - deriving its name from America's other fatal space mission, Apollo I - would subsidize development of safety mechanisms and alternative propulsion schemes for space exploration.
Our planet is small. Our resources are limited. Only a hundred miles above our heads is the gateway to, literally, a universe of options. There are planets packed with natural resources and room for human habitation. There are asteroids which at once pose a direct threat to our planet and could be a staggeringly rich source of raw materials for the improvement of human civilization. And, as always in a new realm, there is a near infinite space which will provide further insights into this incredible and complex universe in which we are such small but special players.
Now is not the time to draw back from our commitment to space. If anything, we should conclude that the loss of Columbia means that we have reached the limits - after 40 years of remarkable successes - of government monopoly over rich space exploration.
I suspect that the crew of Columbia and their families would agree. After all, they were drawn to the space program because of the opportunity to do something revolutionary, brave, and necessary for our world, not because they wanted to get rich. They would - I hope - support any initiative which would have given them more opportunity to do the work they loved. If we could demonstrate that private control of the space program would, in fact, radically expand that space program - in the same way that private corporations increased and improved the reach of the automobile, the airplane, telecommunications networks, and the Internet - I believe that those astronauts and the astronauts who remain would support us.
Don't give up on space. It is not only our future, but also our present. Make it better, do not declare it dead with those men and women who have died in their ongoing quest to expand the reach and the value of our lives.
Speaking from the trenches of law, friends, you've got it wrong. Suing them isn't the solution to everything.
Scaring them is.:)
Hello-oooo? Cease and desist letter?
The problem with this is that the transaction costs are so low for just deleting spam that there's no real incentive to pursue legal action against spammers. In other words, it costs me more - far more - to register a complaint against a spammer than I'd ever get in a penalty payment. There's also the legal question of damages: what harm do I suffer from spam, other than annoyance? (I'm not saying there isn't any; rather, it just may be minimal as compared to available damages.)
The real damages are suffered by the network providers who have to route all this crap. But then there's the conundrum that there's no reliable way to separate the wheat (legit email) from the chaff (spam).
I betcha the only real way to defeat spam is to introduce validated transactionids on emails so that the source and destination can be realiably authenticated. Kinda like certified mail in the paper world.
But, then again, that introduces the nasty spectre of MICROPAYMENTS... bleh.
It's probably cheaper for me to filter and delete spam and bitch about it than it would be for me to pay for each individual email.
Then again, my broadband may be cheaper if so much spam weren't sailing through the pipes.
*sigh*... it's turtles all the way down.
Any network provider sysadmins out there got any hard numbers about the percentage of bandwidth (and, thus, profits) eaten up by spam?
This is the title of the contract (duh). It tells you briefly the scope and nature of what is to follow.
This agreement, along with the Service Subscriber Agreement and Installation Agreement, is the complete agreement between Super-Net and the Internet user.
This clause attempts to close the agreement to any outside evidence of contrary intent in the forming of the contract. In many states, this will suffice to cause this contract to be the entirety of the agreement. In many states, however, this clause is merely expressive of an intent to conclude a bargain, and may be supplemented with extra evidence (emails, phone conversations, etc.) that would demonstrate that one of the parties intended something contrary or in addition to this contract.
Super-Net may discontinue or change the services offered and/or modify the terms and conditions of this agreement at anytime. Changes modifications or additions are On-line at www.sssnet.com/faq/terms.htm. If you do not agree to these terms and conditions, please notify Super-Net via email at cable@sssnet.com so we may initiate a closure of your account.
This clause essentially allows Super-Net to vary the services and the terms by which you use them at will, with no notice. This would include pricing, acceptable use, and even the product offering. This essentially labels the agreement as non-negotiable, in that you have to take the agreement - and their services - as is.
1.0 Account and Agreement Term
1.1 This agreement shall remain in effect as long as the Internet User's account remains open, valid or undeleted on an Super-Net server. The Internet User may cancel this agreement at anytime, for any reason by providing Super-Net proper acceptable written notice in accordance to the terms stated herein.
This establishes terms for the start and finish of the agreement. Basically, it means that it starts when you agree to it (accept their offer, or, depending on the way they phrase it, make an offer to accept their product, which they then accept by taking your payment information), and it ends whenever you notify them in writing.
2.0 Account Cancellation Requests
2.1 Cancellation of an account requires at least 24 hours notice and must be received in writing via fax or email at cable@sssnet.com. Such requests must be received 30 days prior to the 1st of the month in order to be processed by the beginning of the next accounting cycle.
2.2 All Super-Net accounts must be paid in full before cancellation is complete.
This tells you that you are bound by a 24-hour notice provision, meaning you may notify them one day, and you'll actually cancel the next. The second sentence means that they can bill you for another month if you don't cancel 30 days out from the next cycle. You'd probably get a refund, but it means they have some extra cash for a short time.
3.0 Indemnification
3.1 The Internet User acknowledges that Super-Net makes an honest effort to keep the software, data and information available on Super-Net's servers accurate. Super-Net has no control over any information, data or software that is available through the Internet. Super-Net makes no warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied, regarding the accuracy, or validity of data, software and information available. Use of data, software or information obtained from or through Super-Net is always at the risk of the Internet User.
This basically says Super-Net will make a good faith effort to keep things working, but you can't hold them responsible ("no warranty of any kind") if something goes amiss. They then say, in the last sentence, that you can't hold them responsible if something bad happens to you while you use their bandwidth. Illustration - if someone h4x0rs j00 and is able to do so at least in part because of a weakness in their system, you're (purportedly) out of luck.
3.2 The Internet User agrees to indemnify and hold Super-Net harmless from any and all claims, including attorney's fees, resulting from the Internet User receiving Super-Net Cable Modem services or software that causes direct or indirect damage to the Internet User or another party.
And, this gives some meat to the prior assertion, saying that you can't hold Super-Net liable (make them pay for harms) for harms you or another person may suffer. Even more, it means you may have to pay THEM if harm comes to someone else via your computer (say someone used your computer to launch an attack, the target suffered damage, and sued Super-Net - you may be subject to a lawsuit to recover Super-Net's defense costs and penalties).
4.0 Fees and penalties
4.1 Charges or fees associated with canceled, closed or terminated accounts are not prorated. Accounting cycles begin the first of each month.
Basic, just tells you when the billing is. This is all the notice they are required to give you that they're going to bill you.
4.2 All payments shall be paid in advance of receiving services.
You pay for the month ahead, not the month just completed. In other words, you're paying for services to be rendered, not services already rendered.
4.3 Payment is due at the beginning of each billing cycle. Personal accounts are billed to your credit card that you have provided for this purpose.
No big deal. They basically say you have to pay by credit card.
4.4 Accounts that are delinquent by two accounting cycles are may be terminated and deleted.
Keep at least two months current or they'll cut you off. That also means, if you miss a month, they WON'T cut you off.
4.5 In the event an account is terminated a reconnection charge not exceeding $25.00 is required to remove the hold status.
They reserve the right to hit you for $25.00 (or less, yeah, right) to reconnect you after you've been disconnected for any reason.
4.6 The Internet User acknowledges account responsibility until payment is made in full. In the event that the cable modem was rented or leased monthly account basic charges remain in effect until the cable modem is returned or paid for in full.
This sets you up to be responsible for paying for your service until you are able to return the hardware. If you don't or can't for some reason, they'll keep dinging you.
4.7 There is a $35.00 service charge for each returned check.
Penalize you for being a check bouncer.
4.8 Super-Net will publish a notice of fee increases 10 days before such increases take effect.
Here they qualify their "change terms or products at any time" clause above by saying they'll "let you know" 10 days before they raise your rates. "Letting you know" is a fuzzy term - all they may have to do is post the rate change somewhere on their site, and then you're expected to stay aware of the changes. This is called "constructive notice."
4.9 A $500 fee will be incurred for failure to return the cable modem within 30 days of termination.
Self explanatory. Return the equipment or get hit with a penalty.
5.0 Accounts and Use of Services
5.1 The Internet User agrees to maintain a secure password. Secure passwords are those that are between 6 and 8 characters long, contain upper and lower case letters, and numbers or other characters.
CYA clause... They want you to choose a secure password. Note, however, that they do not provide any links to a secure password generator - that's so they can't be liable if you were to use such a service and still get hacked. The burden, once again, is on you.
5.2 The Internet User agrees not to use Super-Net Cable Modem services to make unauthorized attempts to access the computers, accounts, files, systems and networks of others.
Don't hack anybody. A good lawyer may be able to construe this to mean "Don't use Kazaa." (unauthorized attempts to access... files... of others -- unauthorized by whom?)
5.3 The Internet User understands that no third party cable modems will be allowed on the cable system, which were not bought from or provided by Super-Net.
You must use their equipment.
5.4 The Internet User understands that an active cable TV connection from Massillon Cable TV is required in order to use a cable modem. A separate charge exists for cable TV service. Failure to maintain an active cable TV connection will cause an interruption of cable modem service. Monthly service charges for cable modem service will continue even if cable TV service is discontinued.
You've got to buy their cable service to keep their internet service. Pleasant of them, no?
6.0 Net Etiquette
6.1 The Internet User acknowledges proper Internet etiquette will be practiced at all times. The Internet User agrees to use the services provided by Super-Net as permitted by applicable local, state, and federal laws. The Internet User agrees, therefore, not to use these services to conduct any business or activity or solicit the performance of any activity that is prohibited by law. All commercial usage by the account holder, such as advertising, announcements or postings shall be performed in a considerate, unobtrusive manner that shall not waste or overuse Internet data bandwidth. Spamming (the sending of large volumes of email) is considered to be obtrusive.
Don't do anything that might be construed as illegal. Also, be polite. Explicitly, they say spamming is wrong, as well as commercial use. They do NOT, however, exclude other activities in this clause. Once they set out specific things that are "wrong" they can't add to that list at will - or, they can, but they'll only have an effect on you after they add them to the contract, and will likely not be applicable to anything you did before.
7.0 Abuse of Services
7.1 Usage of Super-Net resources that disrupts the normal use of Super-Net servers, other Internet hosts and/or other Super-Net customers is considered to be abuse of resources and is grounds for account cancellation. Some examples of system abuse include consuming excessive amounts of memory, circuit bandwidth or CPU time.
Don't use any file sharing systems, don't attempt to use the idle CPU cycles of others without their permission, and don't do anything (this is broad) that might use "excessive" amounts of computer resources. They don't define excessive, probably to give themselves the flexibility to define excessive should they ever end up in court.
7.2 Depending on the nature and the severity of the abuse, the user may have their account suspended by Super-Net. Occasionally, unintentional misuse is misinterpreted as intentional misuse. Customers who believe their activity has been misinterpreted may appeal to Super-Net.
Do something they consider wrong, and you'll be terminated without notice. Then you have to ask them to reconnect you and prove that you weren't doing anything wrong.
7.3 Super-Net does not allow the unprotected distribution or storage of any pornographic or like material in any Internet User's account. Posting such material for public access is grounds for immediate account cancellation.
Don't post nudie pictures on your website. This MAY also apply to pornography shared through Kazaa.
7.4 Harassment of others via the use of Super-Net access is grounds for account cancellation.
Don't stalk the people you play Everquest with.
7.5 Operating a web or other publicly accessible server via an Super-Net cable modem is prohibited. (This includes Napster, Songspy..etc)
No web servers, no file sharing systems. What's interesting is that by the letter of this agreement, a "publicly accessible server" could be interpreted as chat programs, even ping.
7.6 Providing Internet access to a user at another location via the cable modem is prohibited.
You can't resell the service or splice your neighbor onto the account.
8.0 Copyrighted and Public Domain Material
8.1 Public Domain materials may be downloaded or uploaded using Super-Net access. The Internet User accepts all responsibilities and assumes all risks that are associated with the determination of whether or not material obtained via Super-Net is in the public domain.
You can download non-copyrighted music to your heart's content, but if you get busted downloading copyrighted stuff, you can't sue Super-Net for contribution to any civil damages you might incur.
8.2 As provided by United States law and by International treaties, copyrighted materials (like, images, text, and software) may not be uploaded using Super-Net services without the permission of the copyright holder. Copyrighted materials may be downloaded for personal use. Except as expressly permitted, materials under copyright may not be distributed to others. Copyrighted material may not be changed or modified in an way.
You can download copyrighted materials you have permission to access (RealAudio streams you've paid for, etc.), but you can't modify them (scratch using your PC for business if you're in digital media), or reupload them.
8.3 Notice: Some materials on the Internet and provided by Super-Net are called "SHAREWARE" or "FREEWARE." Generally these materials are copyrighted. The copyright holder often gives limited permission as to the use of these materials. If you choose to continue using the materials, the copyright holder requests that you register your usage and may ask that you pay a license fee.
Strange to include this. Basically, they're saying to pay up for your shareware. Odd that they would include this, unless - at the beginning - they give you shareware as part of their package.
9.0 Electronic Data Services Provided
9.1 Super-Net will provide Internet and computer related services on its data access servers to individual and business Internet Users for a fee, provided the Internet User complies with the terms and conditions set forth in this agreement.
This tells you what they'll do, and under what circumstances.
9.2 Super-Net Cable Modem Services are defined as Internet communications access and information services. These services also include access to software, computing, data and information services provided by others via the Internet.
This specifically defines what the cable modem service consists of. You could also call this clause "what is a network?"...
9.3 Super-Net Cable Modem Services include access to USENET Newsgroups. Some groups contain language or images of subjects intended for adults. Internet Users less than 18 years old must have a parent or legal guardian agree to these conditions to indicate acceptance and knowledge of this.
Don't be surprised if you see naughty words in USENET. And if you're under 18, don't even look at the stuff.
10.0 Super-Net right reserved
10.1 Super-Net reserves the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason, as with in Super-Net's rights as a business entity in accordance with the laws of the Internet User's State.
They say that they can deny service to anybody they don't like, unless denying service would itself be illegal (i.e., denying based on race, etc.)
11.0 Effective Date
11.1 This agreement became effective upon the opening of the Internet Users new account.
As soon as you "open" the account, the terms apply. Here's a perfect example of why the very first clause (final and complete) is fuzzy: When - exactly - did you open your account? When you requested service? When you provided them with a credit card? When you actually paid for your first month or any setup fees?
Anyway, IANAL (yet), so don't rely on this information as legal advice (see, cover my own ass). But this is actually a pretty basic contract, and though you don't have any leverage at all to negotiate it, a court may - depending on the state - let you wiggle out of a number of the provisions. Then again, they may not.
Oh, and it doesn't say a word about operating a firewall, router, or multiple computers, unless they were able to construe the "excessive use" provision as prohibiting multiple computers.
Speaking as somebody who will be an attorney in the relatively near future, this guy is full of horse shit, and he is exactly the type of scum-sucking attention slut that I'm going to work to get booted from the ABA (American Bar Association).
There, was that enough defamation? Tough. I can't ruin his reputation any more than it already is. I should sue this prick for defamation of MY character for the crap I'll have to deal with from friends over this./me begs forgiveness from the kind hordes of Slashdot for the behavior of the toothless morons who defame my profession.
Do you ever have one of those moments where you realize how few people in the world would understand a sentence you just read? Then you stop and ask yourself if you just understood the sentence you just read? I mean, "1024-bit RSA Keys..." That's pretty easy to comprehend, right?
But if I were to look my dear 67-year-old father straight in the eyes and ask him, "Dad, are 1024-bit RSA keys unsafe?" first he'd stare at me blankly, then he'd start to drool, and finally he'd drool again. And he's a very smart man.
Sorry, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay offtopic, but I just had one of those "knowing more and more about less and less" moments. Go on about your business.
I believe this move pretty much defines "obfuscation." It's easy to oppose, single out, and criticize "Palladium." It's a lot harder to oppose, single out, and criticize "secure network of corporate jargon and words that are put in to make the name longer initiative lemur".
(If you're tempted to mod this "redundant", think about giving me some mercy points for using a nickel word like "obfuscation."):)
That's what law and lawyers are for. Think about it. 99% of the stuff people go to civil litigation for nowadays is stuff that might have resulted in a duel in the past. Encroachment on property? Bang. Breached contract? Bang. Fraud, deceit, misappropriation of village wheat. Bang.
Now we just sue the hell out of each other and nobody gets killed.
Nation states evolved from the personal fiefdoms of kings, but, at some point, the rule of law stopped counting. Oh, that's right, presidents and kings aren't bound by law.
You know, I'm not a huge Ayn Rand fan. I mean, I've read all her books twice, I've read some of the commentaries, I even bought the t-shirt. Ok, just kidding on the last part. Even with all this Rand reading, I'm not a _fan_ of hers.
But.
The RIAA just screams out as one of those old school steel companies that refused to get with the program, refused to change its technology, refused to acknowledge that its power would ebb unless it changed the way it did business. If nothing else, Ayn Rand understood that entrenched bureaucracies tend to feed entrenched "industriopolies"...
These RIAA people are pathetic. I mean, good lord, if I complained this much when I was a kid, I'd get whacked on the head with a frying pan. If I complained like this in class today, my professor would tell me "life's tough, you've got to move faster than everybody else." And rightly so.
But, as I've said before, the problem isn't with the RIAA and MPAA. They damn well have the right to demand protection for their industry. They probably have a fiduciary duty (at least in the short term) to do it.
It's us - the media-buying lemmings - who allow them to stick around and not fade off into mediocrity.
Example: 1991, Gulf War. Saddam huffed and puffed that the streets were going to run red with American blood. Six weeks later, he was routed in one of the most remarkable (set aside any political differences you have with the Gulf War -- it was a military marvel) military victories in history.
So why does anybody pay attention to the RIAA? Why does anyone take them seriously? They're just a bunch of whiners. Very rich, very powerful whiners. Whiners whose power absolutely depends on you giving them credibility.
If we whine and moan about how they whine and moan, eventually we'll all just be whining and moaning, and the only thing that'll be left is Britney-clones strutting their boobies to prepubescent boys who have waaaay too much access to mom's credit card. That, my friends, has got to stop.
I challenge every single one of you to write a letter to your Congressman (or woman), Senator, President, Prime Minister, Member of Parliament, Dictator, Central Committee Member, or guru and tell them "We don't care about the RIAA. We don't buy their product." Don't talk about it. Just do it.
Arg. And, yes, I just compared the RIAA to Saddam's Iraq. Oh, and I'm also going to be sued by Nike now. Crap.
Re:Cancer (more funny) - OT
on
1KM 802.11b @ 2MB
·
· Score: 3, Funny
'Google fapping'?
whee.........
Re:Cancer (more funny) - OT
on
1KM 802.11b @ 2MB
·
· Score: 3, Funny
I just re-read my own post an realized that at some point in the evening I regressed to 12 years old.
Thank you, Slashdot, for making me the man^H^H^Hboy I am today.
Could this be a new sport? "Prurient Google Links From Innocuous Terms"
Lordy, that sounded like a scholarly treatise.
Maybe "Search for 'rocks' and get your rocks off"
Of course, that presumes rocks, but I couldn't think of any witty synonyms for ovaries... at least none that would result in a nudie Google result.
Anyway, $$$$$exyGal scores a nice, round 69 on her first go. Me, I scored a goose, but, then again, there's nothing sexy about electromagnetic radiation in West Virginia.
I wonder if the great scourge of the twenty-first century will be runaway cancer rates with all the RF radiation we're pumping into the air. Cell phones, LOS broadband, radar, radio...
I feel my children growing third arms, though they be but little swimmers in my special place.
South Carolina already has a use tax, believe it or not. I'm not sure how many people actually pay it, but it's equal to the sales tax on a good of that value. (It can't technically be a sales tax if the sale was not in South Carolina.)
I don't know, I look at the bloat and waste of government, the useless bureaucrats secure in their firing-proof jobs, and I wonder if taxation for propogation is really the policy I want. I'm a political liberal in many respects, but I'm far more interested in the government being able to provide services well, not throwing more effing money at broken systems.
The experience of AOL execs working at Time-Warner must be comparable to a Dollar General regional manager being appointed Director of Purchasing for Macy's. *shudder*
Slashdot Mirror
Why in God's name is this modded troll? Have we offended the slathering hordes of Java devotees? Lemme tell all of you something, when I was laid-off from a position, I went to interview with two shops, both with a heavy Java focus, and roughly equivalent in their focus, style, and clients. I didn't get a job with the first. But with the second, I was given some very good advice: Talk a lot about J2EE, Beans, and a bunch of other buzzwords, a few of which I had never heard of. "Doesn't matter if you don't know, man, just throw the words in. That's all they care about."
.NET. (Don't start gnawing on me because I put "portability" and ".NET" in the same sentence - I was referring to the VM.)
Got the job.
Java is so much about a culture and not a technology that it's disgusting. And it's a pity too, because all the PRINCIPLES of Java (portability through the VM, objectification, etc.) are so good that Microsoft took them to build
Hell, I think Java is a great language. It concerns me that it takes seventeen steps to accomplish something as basic as opening a database connection, grabbing some results, and outputting them into an HTML stream (and seventeen may be generous). But, it's a very straightforward language, very teachable because it's so logical.
But too much of the culture is fluff. Why is it that Sun doesn't focus on point releases that improve performance but instead focuses on getin gthe newest buzzword, uh, "feature" out the door? Why did they invent something called Java2 which is, IIRC, just Java 1.3? Because they're more concerned about IMAGE than about getting their product - which is great in principle - in a usable state.
But let's talk substantively. I've developed large scale server-side applications in Java, C, C++, and - on the web-app side - PHP, Cold Fusion, and ASP.
The slowest of those was, almost without exception, Java. Java took the most coding to do a basic task, and Java was BY FAR the most difficult to package, deploy, and deliver to my customers. That's a real pity, because I was about 90% certain that our customer's architecture didn't really matter if we were playing with Java. Upgrading those old Dell NT servers to IBM? No problem. We'll just move the app over, and it should run without a hitch.
But, lord have mercy, it ran slowly.
To top it all off, here's some advice I received from a Java-guru at another company. I was griping about how slow Java was, and he said to me, "Oh, everybody knows it's slow. But why worry? Hardware's getting faster every day. True, 2ms is half the speed of 1ms, but who's gonna notice?"
I almost fell off my chair. It's that sort of laziness that makes my skin crawl.
Look, I love Java. I want it to succeed. It's a brilliant idea: an utterly cross-platform language whose apps run without regard to the hardware and OS under them.
But it's a seriously flawed masterpiece.
(The funny thing is, I was just going to write "Why was this modded troll? But then my post bloated... kinda like how you go to write "Hello World" in Java and... ok, ok, nevermind.)
It's tragic to watch the current fallout of the Columbia disaster. Certainly NASA, relevant manufacturers, and the United States Government will be asked to answer for any negligence which may have caused the loss of the shuttle and her seven crew. But I would implore anyone reading this not to conclude that the loss of the Columbia should mean the end of human spaceflight.
If anything, our commitment to space should be radically expanded. The current problems in the space program are the result of all power and authority over the development of space exploration being held in a single decision-making body. NASA, which is a marvelous organization and which certainly provided the basis for the early successes in space, is simply not equipped to move space exploration ahead. It is a government entity, unbound by market considerations, and weighed down by bureaucratic inefficiencies which make radical changes - such as the introduction of new technologies in a cost-effective manner - impossible.
The question, however, must be posed whether space exploration in itself is valuable enough to transfer to the private sector. This question is analogous to the gradual shift in the control of earthbound exploration schemes from sovereign control to chartered corporations. To answer the question, however, without respect to the analogy, no, space exploration in itself is not particularly valuable. It is another medium, another vehicle for transporting humans and their commerce, as well as seeing what's out there. I doubt any private venture at this point would find this to be a profitable scheme without, to be circular, some way to make profits from it.
Thus the analogy: space travel is valuable only insofar as it brings benefit to the people of this planet, or, more specifically, to the shareholders of any corporations which undertake it. In near space, the profits are easy to identify. The GPS system which allows boaters to find their way to fishing spots provided the "spiritual" basis for private venture such as XM Radio. Government-financed spy satellites showed private corporations that money could be made selling space-based imagery of the planet.
But none of these requires human space flight. In order for there to be profit in the human expansion into space, there must be some market for the products which can be produced exclusively or most efficiently in space, whether directly in the case of manufactured goods or indirectly in the case of products developed using experimental data acquired in space. As one discussion group poster noted in response to a question on the necessity of humans to supervise space-based experiments, "It's hard to count ants from 140 miles down."
The International Space Station is a fiasco, and so is the space shuttle. Given the radical developments in materials sciences and knowledge of the effects of space on human bodies, it is as unlikely that the shuttles would have remained in private service for twenty years as to consider that Boeing might continue to build aircraft using the processes and materials perfected during the development of, say, the now-obsolete 727. Even a plane that has had a 30-year lifespan such as the 737 is today not the same plane except in the most superficial way as the first model that flew out of Everett Field.
My plan for space would include the following broad steps. First, ground the shuttle fleet only as long as is necessary to conduct materials review of the launch equipment (fuel tank and rockets), the cooling tile system, and any particularly vulnerable areas of the shuttle's structure (particularly any structural elements on the bottom of the spacecraft). Second, apply any changes rapidly - within no more than two years - with a national commitment to redeploy the shuttle as a stopgap measure in the interests of national security and commerce (as well as prestige). Third, set a hard deadline to retire the shuttles by 2014 at the absolute latest - perhaps 2012 to coincide with the 50th anniversary of American spaceflight. Fourth, provide incentives to corporations to begin manned space flight outside the scope of NASA oversight. Fifth, turn NASA into a regulatory agency for the purposes of establishing safety guidelines; and a science agency which would fund and oversee pure science activities in space. Sixth, provide ongoing incentives for the next two or three decades to promote human exploitation of space by private corporations.
The money for such incentives could probably be found in the monies freed up by the unfortunate loss of Columbia. I would name two incentive packages: the Challenger Fund for the rapid commercialization of space exploration, and the Columbia Fund for the ongoing support of pure science exploration by government or commercial entities. A third package, the Apollo Fund - deriving its name from America's other fatal space mission, Apollo I - would subsidize development of safety mechanisms and alternative propulsion schemes for space exploration.
Our planet is small. Our resources are limited. Only a hundred miles above our heads is the gateway to, literally, a universe of options. There are planets packed with natural resources and room for human habitation. There are asteroids which at once pose a direct threat to our planet and could be a staggeringly rich source of raw materials for the improvement of human civilization. And, as always in a new realm, there is a near infinite space which will provide further insights into this incredible and complex universe in which we are such small but special players.
Now is not the time to draw back from our commitment to space. If anything, we should conclude that the loss of Columbia means that we have reached the limits - after 40 years of remarkable successes - of government monopoly over rich space exploration.
I suspect that the crew of Columbia and their families would agree. After all, they were drawn to the space program because of the opportunity to do something revolutionary, brave, and necessary for our world, not because they wanted to get rich. They would - I hope - support any initiative which would have given them more opportunity to do the work they loved. If we could demonstrate that private control of the space program would, in fact, radically expand that space program - in the same way that private corporations increased and improved the reach of the automobile, the airplane, telecommunications networks, and the Internet - I believe that those astronauts and the astronauts who remain would support us.
Don't give up on space. It is not only our future, but also our present. Make it better, do not declare it dead with those men and women who have died in their ongoing quest to expand the reach and the value of our lives.
Speaking from the trenches of law, friends, you've got it wrong. Suing them isn't the solution to everything. Scaring them is. :)
Hello-oooo? Cease and desist letter?
The problem with this is that the transaction costs are so low for just deleting spam that there's no real incentive to pursue legal action against spammers. In other words, it costs me more - far more - to register a complaint against a spammer than I'd ever get in a penalty payment. There's also the legal question of damages: what harm do I suffer from spam, other than annoyance? (I'm not saying there isn't any; rather, it just may be minimal as compared to available damages.)
... it's turtles all the way down.
The real damages are suffered by the network providers who have to route all this crap. But then there's the conundrum that there's no reliable way to separate the wheat (legit email) from the chaff (spam).
I betcha the only real way to defeat spam is to introduce validated transactionids on emails so that the source and destination can be realiably authenticated. Kinda like certified mail in the paper world.
But, then again, that introduces the nasty spectre of MICROPAYMENTS... bleh.
It's probably cheaper for me to filter and delete spam and bitch about it than it would be for me to pay for each individual email.
Then again, my broadband may be cheaper if so much spam weren't sailing through the pipes.
*sigh*
Any network provider sysadmins out there got any hard numbers about the percentage of bandwidth (and, thus, profits) eaten up by spam?
Anyway, IANAL (yet), so don't rely on this information as legal advice (see, cover my own ass). But this is actually a pretty basic contract, and though you don't have any leverage at all to negotiate it, a court may - depending on the state - let you wiggle out of a number of the provisions. Then again, they may not.
Oh, and it doesn't say a word about operating a firewall, router, or multiple computers, unless they were able to construe the "excessive use" provision as prohibiting multiple computers.
Speaking as somebody who will be an attorney in the relatively near future, this guy is full of horse shit, and he is exactly the type of scum-sucking attention slut that I'm going to work to get booted from the ABA (American Bar Association).
/me begs forgiveness from the kind hordes of Slashdot for the behavior of the toothless morons who defame my profession.
There, was that enough defamation? Tough. I can't ruin his reputation any more than it already is. I should sue this prick for defamation of MY character for the crap I'll have to deal with from friends over this.
Do you ever have one of those moments where you realize how few people in the world would understand a sentence you just read? Then you stop and ask yourself if you just understood the sentence you just read? I mean, "1024-bit RSA Keys..." That's pretty easy to comprehend, right?
But if I were to look my dear 67-year-old father straight in the eyes and ask him, "Dad, are 1024-bit RSA keys unsafe?" first he'd stare at me blankly, then he'd start to drool, and finally he'd drool again. And he's a very smart man.
Sorry, waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay offtopic, but I just had one of those "knowing more and more about less and less" moments. Go on about your business.
Love, Me.
I believe this move pretty much defines "obfuscation." It's easy to oppose, single out, and criticize "Palladium." It's a lot harder to oppose, single out, and criticize "secure network of corporate jargon and words that are put in to make the name longer initiative lemur".
:)
(If you're tempted to mod this "redundant", think about giving me some mercy points for using a nickel word like "obfuscation.")
That's what law and lawyers are for. Think about it. 99% of the stuff people go to civil litigation for nowadays is stuff that might have resulted in a duel in the past. Encroachment on property? Bang. Breached contract? Bang. Fraud, deceit, misappropriation of village wheat. Bang.
Now we just sue the hell out of each other and nobody gets killed.
Nation states evolved from the personal fiefdoms of kings, but, at some point, the rule of law stopped counting. Oh, that's right, presidents and kings aren't bound by law.
My bad.
heheh, and here I thought it was a great mystery. :)
But.
The RIAA just screams out as one of those old school steel companies that refused to get with the program, refused to change its technology, refused to acknowledge that its power would ebb unless it changed the way it did business. If nothing else, Ayn Rand understood that entrenched bureaucracies tend to feed entrenched "industriopolies" ...
These RIAA people are pathetic. I mean, good lord, if I complained this much when I was a kid, I'd get whacked on the head with a frying pan. If I complained like this in class today, my professor would tell me "life's tough, you've got to move faster than everybody else." And rightly so.
But, as I've said before, the problem isn't with the RIAA and MPAA. They damn well have the right to demand protection for their industry. They probably have a fiduciary duty (at least in the short term) to do it.
It's us - the media-buying lemmings - who allow them to stick around and not fade off into mediocrity.
Example: 1991, Gulf War. Saddam huffed and puffed that the streets were going to run red with American blood. Six weeks later, he was routed in one of the most remarkable (set aside any political differences you have with the Gulf War -- it was a military marvel) military victories in history.
So why does anybody pay attention to the RIAA? Why does anyone take them seriously? They're just a bunch of whiners. Very rich, very powerful whiners. Whiners whose power absolutely depends on you giving them credibility.
If we whine and moan about how they whine and moan, eventually we'll all just be whining and moaning, and the only thing that'll be left is Britney-clones strutting their boobies to prepubescent boys who have waaaay too much access to mom's credit card. That, my friends, has got to stop.
I challenge every single one of you to write a letter to your Congressman (or woman), Senator, President, Prime Minister, Member of Parliament, Dictator, Central Committee Member, or guru and tell them "We don't care about the RIAA. We don't buy their product." Don't talk about it. Just do it.
Arg. And, yes, I just compared the RIAA to Saddam's Iraq. Oh, and I'm also going to be sued by Nike now. Crap.
whee.........
Thank you, Slashdot, for making me the man^H^H^Hboy I am today.
Lordy, that sounded like a scholarly treatise.
Maybe "Search for 'rocks' and get your rocks off"
Of course, that presumes rocks, but I couldn't think of any witty synonyms for ovaries... at least none that would result in a nudie Google result.
Anyway, $$$$$exyGal scores a nice, round 69 on her first go. Me, I scored a goose, but, then again, there's nothing sexy about electromagnetic radiation in West Virginia.
*looks at crotch*
*looks at map of West Virginia*
*looks at crotch*
Nevermind.
I feel my children growing third arms, though they be but little swimmers in my special place.
Just getting that out of the way.
I don't know, I look at the bloat and waste of government, the useless bureaucrats secure in their firing-proof jobs, and I wonder if taxation for propogation is really the policy I want. I'm a political liberal in many respects, but I'm far more interested in the government being able to provide services well, not throwing more effing money at broken systems.
The worst part is that one of them just "discovered" EQ two days ago. I haven't seen him since.
They hibernate by day, and at night engage in peculiar mating rituals involving hooting at moving images made by their god.
dammit... yesterday I offended the fantasy fans... tonight I offend the Everquesties... I must hate myself...
The experience of AOL execs working at Time-Warner must be comparable to a Dollar General regional manager being appointed Director of Purchasing for Macy's. *shudder*
Printing AOL CDs maybe?
Foo... he's got some work to do.
That's probably because Steve Case sucked him dry by destroying the market value of the stocks he held.
Hrm... Maybe Ted should sue Steve...
"Hi Steve, you've got jail."