Consider the following paragraph from the article:
The essential paradigm of cyberspace is creating partially situated identities out of actual or potential social reality in terms of canonical forms of human contact, thus renormalizing the phenomenology of narrative space and requiring the naturalization of the intersubjective cognitive strategy, and thereby resolving the dialectics of metaphorical thoughts, each problematic to the other, collectively redefining and reifying the paradigm of the parable of the model of the metaphor.
Now read an essay by the postmodernism generator. Can you tell the difference?;-)
The researchers claim that there's a "flaw in black hole theory" which they're fixing. But from what I understand, there currently is no theory of black holes right now, mostly intelligent guessing. We have general relativity and quantum mechanics, and we don't know how to reconcile them when we want to analyze the interior of black holes.
So its not as though there's a whole nice theory and they're plunning a hole in it. Any theory of black holes had better be a TOE (theory of everything), otherwise it has no leg to stand on.
Also, I've never managed to make sense of the claims about our universe being one of many or just a tiny part of something else etc. By occam's razor, those other things are unknowable and so it doesn't make sense to talk about them. That would be theology, not science.
But then again, IANAP, but these guys are, so whatever I said could be complete BS.
Everyone please read this before you start flaming.
The last/. article about the new file selector was filled with "this is totally stupid", "this is worse than the old file selector", "this is the last chance they have to fix it, and they've royally screwed it up", "usability experts, bah! This is why gnome will never catch up with kde" etc.
Now listen. The change that's happenning in the new file selector is primarily that they're creating a new API. Got it? The programming API. That's why the screenshots looked the same. The screenshots tell you nothing. As long as the API doesn't suck the front end can be freely changed without breaking anything, and everyone can do their own mockups and various ideas can be tried and the experts can weigh in with their opinions and so on. This can go on for a long time, and the front end will stabilize when it has reached (near) perfection.
As an Indian I can tell you that a Bangalore version of the dot bomb is unlikely to happen because Indian entrepreneurs are considerably more conservative/cautious than their American counterparts.
Yeah - they'll move to India too. You can get a seriously big house there,
Hello, where did you pull that out of? India has over a billion people with far less the area of the US. There aren't any big houses here except for 100 year old bungalows. Few people
have houses with more than 2 or 3 rooms with barely enough space to put a couple of beds.
great food,
I'm with you:)
and your kitchen staff won't be a: Expensive, or b: Illegal.
Aren't you forgetting c: Unethical?
I'm guessing the tax advantages are pretty significant too.
Somewhat. We don't have a stupid health care system that fleeces you off. But still tax will eat about 30%, at least for IT types.
And you get to watch elephant polo!!!
No idea what you're talking about. My guess is you were trying to be insulting.
Google for digital camera. The first 3 results are "digital camera reviews", "Digital Camera Resource Page", and "complete guide to digital cameras", exactly the opposite of what parent claims.
Elaborating slightly on this, the Itanium is a "VLIW" chip, which is a wholly different way of doing computation compared to the more usual "superscalar" paradigm. That's why it wasn't compatible with the x86, that's why they targeted it at servers doing heavy computation etc. The AMD chip, on the other hand, can support x86 relatively easily by including a "morphing layer" (I think that's the name) which maps x86 instructions to the native instructions of the chip. So they're able to target desktops.
My e-mail address came out as "undefinedundefinedundefinedundefinedundefined" in Konqueror.
You might have entered an empty string as one of the values?
Your javelin idea sounds pretty good, but what happens when spammers eventually get a thousand addresses from your domain, so your bandwidth multiplies thousandfold? (though you block all of it). If you're using a free online email service rather than your own server you're fine I guess:)
Google for "blog spam". There are bots going around looking for Submit links in the most popular blogs and spamming them. Its probably only a matter of time before they extend that to the whole of the web.
If you need to keep changing your filter, the spammers have already won.
It doesn't matter to the spammers if the user's filter can be trivially modified to filter out the spam. If they can get past the currently used filters, that's enough. If they keep doing this constantly, it will mean that users will have to constantly upgrade their spam filters. Many people will get tired after a while and just give up:(
I never said anything about not fighting spammers. Please do fight them. But at the same time, also protect yourself. What you're saying is more like: "I'll go out at night alone and unarmed and I'll fight if I'm attacked." I'm just saying take a gun with you.
Not putting your email online doesn't mean not giving it out at all. It just means don't put it in nice cleartext which spambots can harvest. Obfuscate it so that humans can still gets it while bots can't.
Don't put your email address online, period. Other solutions like filters only address part of the problem, because you still have to pay for the bandwidth and there's the problem of false positives. I wrote a little Javascript Turing email obfuscator, which prevents renders your email address invisible to bots, even those that can execute javascript.
If you want a unified API, look no farther than wxwindows.
It has backends for qt, gtk, ms-windows etc. Trouble with it is that it adds an extra layer of complexity for the programmer and dependency for the end user.
I then created an arbitrary confidence rating (number of mentions in lists divided by nine) and then created an arbitrary number, with 66% of the number coming from the mean rating, and 33% of the number coming from the confidence rating.
So these guys basically admit just everything is arbitrary with numbers pulled out of their asses, and still manage to get on the front page of/.
These financial worms and suits are, almost by definition, too stupid to understand that free means freedom and that linux is a technology, not a product, etc. So we invented the buzzword open source. It helped, but now its abused left and right and MS wants to jump on the bandwagon by showing parts of its source under an NDA which you can't even compile.
The shills at Forbes are so obsessed with money that they have no understanding at all of the technical aspects of SCO vs. IBM, and live in a reality distortion field. Remember the outrageous article that called linux users terrorists? And of course, the "Linux's hit men" article showed that the author is unable to perceive the difference between GPL and public domain. These people are mentally retarded, there's nothing else to describe them.
If they were dealing with an entity with lots of money they would likely have been sued for libel or whatever, but since its a community they can take their liberties with their "analysis" and "predictions". When I looked at Truman holding up a copy the Chicago Daily Tribune making fun of the analysts' predictions (in the recent cell phones article), I realized that this is perhaps what we need. And in fact, slashdot could be the ideal vehicle for that. What I mean is, if we had articles laughing at them and ridiculing them and exposing their idiocy every time
one of their tech "predictions" went hopelessly wrong, and if some other news outlets picked up on it once in a while, then may be it would knock some sense into these morons' heads.
OK, so its now several hours since the story was posted and there's no "spike" in the percentages. Infact the difference of 2% could very well happen due to statistical variation even if it hadn't been slashdotted! Which clearly shows that/.ers don't read articles, but they just click them anyway just for the sadistic thrill of killing the server;^)
Slashdot Mirror
You may want to put that in your sig.
Consider the following paragraph from the article:
Now read an essay by the postmodernism generator. Can you tell the difference? ;-)
If you'd clicked on the article, you'd have seen right at the top of the page
"By Special Contributor Christopher W. Cowell-Shah - Posted on 2004-01-08 19:33:22"
I've seen worse
Mirror
The researchers claim that there's a "flaw in black hole theory" which they're fixing. But from what I understand, there currently is no theory of black holes right now, mostly intelligent guessing. We have general relativity and quantum mechanics, and we don't know how to reconcile them when we want to analyze the interior of black holes.
So its not as though there's a whole nice theory and they're plunning a hole in it. Any theory of black holes had better be a TOE (theory of everything), otherwise it has no leg to stand on.
Also, I've never managed to make sense of the claims about our universe being one of many or just a tiny part of something else etc. By occam's razor, those other things are unknowable and so it doesn't make sense to talk about them. That would be theology, not science.
But then again, IANAP, but these guys are, so whatever I said could be complete BS.
The last /. article about the new file selector was filled with "this is totally stupid", "this is worse than the old file selector", "this is the last chance they have to fix it, and they've royally screwed it up", "usability experts, bah! This is why gnome will never catch up with kde" etc.
Now listen. The change that's happenning in the new file selector is primarily that they're creating a new API. Got it? The programming API. That's why the screenshots looked the same. The screenshots tell you nothing. As long as the API doesn't suck the front end can be freely changed without breaking anything, and everyone can do their own mockups and various ideas can be tried and the experts can weigh in with their opinions and so on. This can go on for a long time, and the front end will stabilize when it has reached (near) perfection.
As an Indian I can tell you that a Bangalore version of the dot bomb is unlikely to happen because Indian entrepreneurs are considerably more conservative/cautious than their American counterparts.
Hello, where did you pull that out of? India has over a billion people with far less the area of the US. There aren't any big houses here except for 100 year old bungalows. Few people have houses with more than 2 or 3 rooms with barely enough space to put a couple of beds.
great food,
I'm with you :)
and your kitchen staff won't be a: Expensive, or b: Illegal.
Aren't you forgetting c: Unethical?
I'm guessing the tax advantages are pretty significant too.
Somewhat. We don't have a stupid health care system that fleeces you off. But still tax will eat about 30%, at least for IT types.
And you get to watch elephant polo!!!
No idea what you're talking about. My guess is you were trying to be insulting.
With the result that Bangalore took off with a bang. Y2K went out with a whimper.
Google for digital camera. The first 3 results are "digital camera reviews", "Digital Camera Resource Page", and "complete guide to digital cameras", exactly the opposite of what parent claims.
Elaborating slightly on this, the Itanium is a "VLIW" chip, which is a wholly different way of doing computation compared to the more usual "superscalar" paradigm. That's why it wasn't compatible with the x86, that's why they targeted it at servers doing heavy computation etc. The AMD chip, on the other hand, can support x86 relatively easily by including a "morphing layer" (I think that's the name) which maps x86 instructions to the native instructions of the chip. So they're able to target desktops.
You might have entered an empty string as one of the values?
Your javelin idea sounds pretty good, but what happens when spammers eventually get a thousand addresses from your domain, so your bandwidth multiplies thousandfold? (though you block all of it). If you're using a free online email service rather than your own server you're fine I guess :)
Google for "blog spam". There are bots going around looking for Submit links in the most popular blogs and spamming them. Its probably only a matter of time before they extend that to the whole of the web.
What usually happens in a dictionary attack is you try a whole dictionary and get several thousand hits. That doesn't work here.
It doesn't matter to the spammers if the user's filter can be trivially modified to filter out the spam. If they can get past the currently used filters, that's enough. If they keep doing this constantly, it will mean that users will have to constantly upgrade their spam filters. Many people will get tired after a while and just give up :(
I was talking about making your email address invisible to bots, not humans.
Wait.. maybe you're a bot? Yes, that would explain everything.
You may want to consider two things though:
I never said anything about not fighting spammers. Please do fight them. But at the same time, also protect yourself. What you're saying is more like: "I'll go out at night alone and unarmed and I'll fight if I'm attacked." I'm just saying take a gun with you.
Not putting your email online doesn't mean not giving it out at all. It just means don't put it in nice cleartext which spambots can harvest. Obfuscate it so that humans can still gets it while bots can't.
Look at the bright side.
For the first time, slashdot has done a "predictions for 2004" story that doesn't have the word "SCO".
Don't put your email address online, period. Other solutions like filters only address part of the problem, because you still have to pay for the bandwidth and there's the problem of false positives. I wrote a little Javascript Turing email obfuscator, which prevents renders your email address invisible to bots, even those that can execute javascript.
An ounce of prevention...
It has backends for qt, gtk, ms-windows etc. Trouble with it is that it adds an extra layer of complexity for the programmer and dependency for the end user.
So these guys basically admit just everything is arbitrary with numbers pulled out of their asses, and still manage to get on the front page of /.
Genius. Pure f'ing genius ;^)
The shills at Forbes are so obsessed with money that they have no understanding at all of the technical aspects of SCO vs. IBM, and live in a reality distortion field. Remember the outrageous article that called linux users terrorists? And of course, the "Linux's hit men" article showed that the author is unable to perceive the difference between GPL and public domain. These people are mentally retarded, there's nothing else to describe them.
If they were dealing with an entity with lots of money they would likely have been sued for libel or whatever, but since its a community they can take their liberties with their "analysis" and "predictions". When I looked at Truman holding up a copy the Chicago Daily Tribune making fun of the analysts' predictions (in the recent cell phones article), I realized that this is perhaps what we need. And in fact, slashdot could be the ideal vehicle for that. What I mean is, if we had articles laughing at them and ridiculing them and exposing their idiocy every time one of their tech "predictions" went hopelessly wrong, and if some other news outlets picked up on it once in a while, then may be it would knock some sense into these morons' heads.
OK, so its now several hours since the story was posted and there's no "spike" in the percentages. Infact the difference of 2% could very well happen due to statistical variation even if it hadn't been slashdotted! Which clearly shows that /.ers don't read articles, but they just click them anyway just for the sadistic thrill of killing the server ;^)