The word you're looking for is lossy. Btw, my mp3s sound great. (I rip at 192kbps.) Have you heard mp3s beyond the 128kbps, misnamed (and often incomplete) files from the p2p networks? I've tried to challenge several self-proclaimed audiophiles to do a blind listen-test between a CD of their choice and my rip of it... They always come up with some excuse to back out.
I know mp3s are lossy, I just don't think the loss is noticable enough to matter.
Vivendi is teaming up with Maverick Records, MP3.com, RollingStone.com, GetMusic.com and MP4.com to offer a remix of a Meshell Ndegeocello track, 'Earth,' for $0.99 online.
How is it that when two people want to exchange mp3s, they just do it, but when a corporation wants to, they've gotta make it all complicated?
To lock everything up, one can type "ssh-add -D" and disable the indentites that have been stored (until next login..). To re-enable it, you can use ssh-add again, but it prompts you for your passphrase in the shell (not in the pretty, aqua, keychain-aware SSHAskPass program) which sort of defeats the purpose. There's got to be a better way...
OK, gotta revise that now that I've used the thing a bit. Locking the keychain doesn't stop me from being able to login to remote hosts password-free (!) but it does stop me from being able to view the stored passphrase in Keychain Access (without entering the keychain passowrd). This still sort of bugs me; I guess I'll just have to get religious about enabling the screensaver (by moving the mouse to a specified corner of the screen) whenever I'm away.
Hey... anyone know how secure the applescreensaver password lock is?
I think you are confused. The article wasn't about bypassing login to the mac itself (that can easily be done in the Login system pref panel, on any osx mac), but rather bypassing passwords for remote systems. There is no way (that I know of at least) to get ssh keys working this elgantly in OS9.
I'm in and out of a couple different shell servers all day, so this is a huge timesaver for me. And it is pretty secure, because every time I close the lid of my ibook the system sleeps, and everytime the system sleeps, my keychain is locked. And I've got a password on my screensaver too. And I don't have my actual remote passwords stored. It's beautiful.
I've never understood the NSFW thing on fark. Do you actually work somewhere where it's OK to surf fark and slashdot but it ISN'T ok to see a nipple here and there? Everytime someone forgets the NSFW bit on fark, theres people bitching (biatching, rather) about how fark got them in trouble for linking to porn... I find it hard to imagine a boss saying "it was ok you were wasting time on fark, but you'd better not be looking at porn!".
(I work somewhere where fark AND porn are ok. as long as shit gets done, i'm free to use the t1 as I see fit... if only the pay was decent it would be a perfect job!)
Also, my slashdot ego demands I point out that I mentioned this on slashdot before the story was posted. (a friend sent me the link from k10k)
Also, also, I think there's something wrong with slashcode... The preview comment page shows this comment dated Tuesday May 21, @05:00PM and the comment I'm replying to dated Wednesday May 22, @05:27AM. That can't be right. (It's currently 10:15am, Wed 5/22... We'll see what the posted timestamp says)
this will set a horrible precedent. Um, it's already been set. Have you seen the kind of patents being handed out recently? Like the one on slashdot a couple weeks ago for using text and images on a webpage for commerce?
How many other things then could be patened? Links? They're working on that.
Seriously, I think this is kind of funny. The more silly patents that get granted, the more irrelevant our patent system becomes... Ditto for copyright law. It's a joke, and becoming more of one all the time.
I like how google jokes on their lab site: Please email us your ideas, comments, suggestions, and patent infringement notices or post a message on the newsgroup for the particular demo you're referencing. (emphasis mine)
Btw, interested persons might enjoy checking out that labs.google.com site (thanks to k10k for the link..)
Re:According to all of the myths and theories
on
The Truth Revealed
·
· Score: 1
2003 (mayan calender 2012 december)
I've read that in a few comments. Can you back it up, or did you just read it and repeat it in this thread? It seems like the mayan's calendar wouldn't have a zero date within nine years of our calendar (2012 minus 2003), or a month named december. Where did the actual mayan date get translated into Dec. 2012 instead of 2003?
Think about it this way: Sandwhich can't be japaneese for jesus. How can 2012 be mayan for 2003?
While this may have been true in the past, I think that they changed their tune on this item.
Hmm, my friend just had his encounter with that policy a few weeks ago... Just went to clarify it with him, he said it was actually in the last 60 days that they wouldn't let him transfer it.
I think the email confirmations are a good thing. You didn't expect to receive email at the administrative contact's address when transfering a domain?!
I mean say an insurance company said you cant transfer your policy at in the last 90 days.
But how would the insurance company stop you? You could just start paying someone else for insurance and stop paying the first company. But VeriSign can fuck you by not releasing the domain for reregistration elsewhere (they have a nasty habit of holding on to names long after they expire). No, it's probably not legal, but yes, that is how they operate.
I think they have a pretty solid case here. Anyone who has seen the letters verisign sent can tell you that they are aboslutely 100% trying to trick people into unknowingly switching registrars. My company has it's domains on dotster, and we've gotten several of these bullshit notices from verisign.
Aside from their sleazy methods of stealing customers, they're a shitty company to deal with (as an intentional customer) as well. A friend of mine got a (real) renewal notice from them (for a domain actually registered with them), and decided he was tired of their fees so he wanted to switch elsewhere. Turns out, you can't transfer a verisign domain in the last 90 days of registration. So to move it away, he had to pay for another whole year.
That was my first thought too, but I havn't seen anyone else offering up proof to the contrary yet, and the links in the story look (sorta) convincing. But... This can't be serious, can it?
Re:Don't bother--screenshots gone.
on
Jaguar Reviewed
·
· Score: 2
They're hosted on someone's Mac.com homepage, and the bandwidth limit has been exceeded. Too bad.
I guess mac.com is the place to host forbidden apple images - saves apple legal the trouble of writing you a cease and desist letter! (if the bandwidth limit doesn't stop you, surely the AUP you agreed to with your mac.com account will...)
Additionally, the GPL has never been tested in court.
And when it is, I sure hope it doesn't have to bust it's cherry battling Microsoft. All the legal and moral righteousness in the world isn't gonna stand up to $40 billion in cash reserves...
And nobody else in the segment of the tech media that's traditionally anti-Microsoft picked up the story, either -- not Slashdot, nor LinuxToday, nor NewsForge.
I guess it's good that they're at least honest. Still, seems sort of funny for a news site to openly admit that they are, in general, biased against a certain company.
As an example, people would create fully cross platform Microsoft Word documents detailing platform dependent procedures. (Go to the Start menu...) People would attach (or recommend) applications which were not available on the other platform, specify fonts or colors which did not translate correctly between platforms, etc.
Thats such bullshit it's laughable. You're discrediting Office for the Mac, because people can't write documents about the fucking Start menu?
The Mac version of Word was atrocious, and the Excel was as slow as a dog.
Years ago, maybe. Like before OS X was even announced. Like When Word 6 was the latest Word on the mac.
Office for mac is now a rewritten-from-the-ground-up polished mac application, fully compatible with it's PC counterpart. In fact, by many accounts, the Mac version of Office is even better than the Windows version.
Your claims are baseless. What are you trying to prove?
Free domain names, $$$-free and restriction-free. Cool aTLDs, that make sense. Built in DynDNS. http://www.freenic.ntwrk Please, enlighten me. Freenic.netwrk doesn't resolve for me; I'm guessing it's some upstart type TLD that my ISP's DNS isn't wise to?
To be honest, I didn't read the entirety of your post after realizing I could easily prove you wrong with an A HREF to back me up... Now that I read it, I guess the rest was actually Insightful. Mine was an impule smart alec reply and I apologize.;)
watch my computer admins yell at those using a MSDOS prompt
I had a friend get suspended for nothing more than opening an MS-DOS prompt window once. True story.
It sounds like the admin who wrote this "Ask Slashdot" knows his stuff; I hope that if he demonstrates that openly, the nerds at his school will go easier on him than we did the techs at my school:)
...I can tell you that you will be widely hated for your stance on this. But with limited bandwidth and the inhernt legal problems, I really can't blame you. I'd sugest that whatever means you find to stop people, you lay out the reasons why it absolutely cannot be tolerated at school, and mention that you don't view p2p file trading itself as bad, just the use of school resources for it.
A "no gnutella" policy alone without explained reasoning will just make you look like a typical asshole-school-administrator type, and that will only make your job more miserable.
Slashdot Mirror
"lossfull" (is that a word?)
The word you're looking for is lossy. Btw, my mp3s sound great. (I rip at 192kbps.) Have you heard mp3s beyond the 128kbps, misnamed (and often incomplete) files from the p2p networks? I've tried to challenge several self-proclaimed audiophiles to do a blind listen-test between a CD of their choice and my rip of it... They always come up with some excuse to back out.
I know mp3s are lossy, I just don't think the loss is noticable enough to matter.
Vivendi is teaming up with Maverick Records, MP3.com, RollingStone.com, GetMusic.com and MP4.com to offer a remix of a Meshell Ndegeocello track, 'Earth,' for $0.99 online.
How is it that when two people want to exchange mp3s, they just do it, but when a corporation wants to, they've gotta make it all complicated?
One more note:
To lock everything up, one can type "ssh-add -D" and disable the indentites that have been stored (until next login..). To re-enable it, you can use ssh-add again, but it prompts you for your passphrase in the shell (not in the pretty, aqua, keychain-aware SSHAskPass program) which sort of defeats the purpose. There's got to be a better way...
OK, gotta revise that now that I've used the thing a bit. Locking the keychain doesn't stop me from being able to login to remote hosts password-free (!) but it does stop me from being able to view the stored passphrase in Keychain Access (without entering the keychain passowrd). This still sort of bugs me; I guess I'll just have to get religious about enabling the screensaver (by moving the mouse to a specified corner of the screen) whenever I'm away.
Hey... anyone know how secure the applescreensaver password lock is?
I think you are confused. The article wasn't about bypassing login to the mac itself (that can easily be done in the Login system pref panel, on any osx mac), but rather bypassing passwords for remote systems. There is no way (that I know of at least) to get ssh keys working this elgantly in OS9.
I'm in and out of a couple different shell servers all day, so this is a huge timesaver for me. And it is pretty secure, because every time I close the lid of my ibook the system sleeps, and everytime the system sleeps, my keychain is locked. And I've got a password on my screensaver too. And I don't have my actual remote passwords stored. It's beautiful.
I've never understood the NSFW thing on fark. Do you actually work somewhere where it's OK to surf fark and slashdot but it ISN'T ok to see a nipple here and there? Everytime someone forgets the NSFW bit on fark, theres people bitching (biatching, rather) about how fark got them in trouble for linking to porn... I find it hard to imagine a boss saying "it was ok you were wasting time on fark, but you'd better not be looking at porn!".
(I work somewhere where fark AND porn are ok. as long as shit gets done, i'm free to use the t1 as I see fit... if only the pay was decent it would be a perfect job!)
Also, my slashdot ego demands I point out that I mentioned this on slashdot before the story was posted. (a friend sent me the link from k10k)
Also, also, I think there's something wrong with slashcode... The preview comment page shows this comment dated Tuesday May 21, @05:00PM and the comment I'm replying to dated Wednesday May 22, @05:27AM. That can't be right. (It's currently 10:15am, Wed 5/22... We'll see what the posted timestamp says)
this will set a horrible precedent.
Um, it's already been set. Have you seen the kind of patents being handed out recently? Like the one on slashdot a couple weeks ago for using text and images on a webpage for commerce?
How many other things then could be patened? Links?
They're working on that.
Seriously, I think this is kind of funny. The more silly patents that get granted, the more irrelevant our patent system becomes... Ditto for copyright law. It's a joke, and becoming more of one all the time.
I like how google jokes on their lab site: Please email us your ideas, comments, suggestions, and patent infringement notices or post a message on the newsgroup for the particular demo you're referencing. (emphasis mine)
Btw, interested persons might enjoy checking out that labs.google.com site (thanks to k10k for the link..)
2003 (mayan calender 2012 december)
I've read that in a few comments. Can you back it up, or did you just read it and repeat it in this thread? It seems like the mayan's calendar wouldn't have a zero date within nine years of our calendar (2012 minus 2003), or a month named december. Where did the actual mayan date get translated into Dec. 2012 instead of 2003?
Think about it this way: Sandwhich can't be japaneese for jesus. How can 2012 be mayan for 2003?
While this may have been true in the past, I think that they changed their tune on this item.
Hmm, my friend just had his encounter with that policy a few weeks ago... Just went to clarify it with him, he said it was actually in the last 60 days that they wouldn't let him transfer it.
I think the email confirmations are a good thing.
You didn't expect to receive email at the administrative contact's address when transfering a domain?!
I mean say an insurance company said you cant transfer your policy at in the last 90 days.
But how would the insurance company stop you? You could just start paying someone else for insurance and stop paying the first company. But VeriSign can fuck you by not releasing the domain for reregistration elsewhere (they have a nasty habit of holding on to names long after they expire). No, it's probably not legal, but yes, that is how they operate.
I think they have a pretty solid case here. Anyone who has seen the letters verisign sent can tell you that they are aboslutely 100% trying to trick people into unknowingly switching registrars. My company has it's domains on dotster, and we've gotten several of these bullshit notices from verisign.
Aside from their sleazy methods of stealing customers, they're a shitty company to deal with (as an intentional customer) as well. A friend of mine got a (real) renewal notice from them (for a domain actually registered with them), and decided he was tired of their fees so he wanted to switch elsewhere. Turns out, you can't transfer a verisign domain in the last 90 days of registration. So to move it away, he had to pay for another whole year.
Go bulkregister!
I hope verisign gets taught a lesson.
So my new ibook (that fedex should be delivering in the next few hours) with an AGP 2x 8mb ATI RAGE Mobility 128 is not included? Wah!!
I can deal with the current speed of Quartz; I just hope the new version doesn't run slower on machines with older (yet still shipping!) video cards.
That was my first thought too, but I havn't seen anyone else offering up proof to the contrary yet, and the links in the story look (sorta) convincing. But... This can't be serious, can it?
They're hosted on someone's Mac.com homepage, and the bandwidth limit has been exceeded. Too bad.
I guess mac.com is the place to host forbidden apple images - saves apple legal the trouble of writing you a cease and desist letter!
(if the bandwidth limit doesn't stop you, surely the AUP you agreed to with your mac.com account will...)
He's got root, and might act mean sometimes, but he sure doesn't look square to me!
Additionally, the GPL has never been tested in court.
And when it is, I sure hope it doesn't have to bust it's cherry battling Microsoft.
All the legal and moral righteousness in the world isn't gonna stand up to $40 billion in cash reserves...
Still, seems sort of funny for a news site to openly admit that they are, in general, biased against a certain company.
*sheepish grin*
I see now that I've been trolled.
Oh well, it happens to the best of us...
As an example, people would create fully cross platform Microsoft Word documents detailing platform dependent procedures. (Go to the Start menu...) People would attach (or recommend) applications which were not available on the other platform, specify fonts or colors which did not translate correctly between platforms, etc.
Thats such bullshit it's laughable. You're discrediting Office for the Mac, because people can't write documents about the fucking Start menu?
The Mac version of Word was atrocious, and the Excel was as slow as a dog.
Years ago, maybe. Like before OS X was even announced. Like When Word 6 was the latest Word on the mac.
Office for mac is now a rewritten-from-the-ground-up polished mac application, fully compatible with it's PC counterpart.
In fact, by many accounts, the Mac version of Office is even better than the Windows version.
Your claims are baseless. What are you trying to prove?
Free domain names, $$$-free and restriction-free. Cool aTLDs, that make sense. Built in DynDNS. http://www.freenic.ntwrk
Please, enlighten me. Freenic.netwrk doesn't resolve for me; I'm guessing it's some upstart type TLD that my ISP's DNS isn't wise to?
To be honest, I didn't read the entirety of your post after realizing I could easily prove you wrong with an A HREF to back me up... Now that I read it, I guess the rest was actually Insightful. Mine was an impule smart alec reply and I apologize. ;)
Seems to me this would discourage online sales more than anything else.
watch my computer admins yell at those using a MSDOS prompt
:)
I had a friend get suspended for nothing more than opening an MS-DOS prompt window once. True story.
It sounds like the admin who wrote this "Ask Slashdot" knows his stuff; I hope that if he demonstrates that openly, the nerds at his school will go easier on him than we did the techs at my school
...I can tell you that you will be widely hated for your stance on this. But with limited bandwidth and the inhernt legal problems, I really can't blame you. I'd sugest that whatever means you find to stop people, you lay out the reasons why it absolutely cannot be tolerated at school, and mention that you don't view p2p file trading itself as bad, just the use of school resources for it.
A "no gnutella" policy alone without explained reasoning will just make you look like a typical asshole-school-administrator type, and that will only make your job more miserable.
Perhaps we should start prosecuting companies like Microsoft and Oracle under those federal laws they passed in the 30s to limit organized crime...
:)
"Bill Gates, you have been convicted of racketeering " has a nice ring to it, doesn't it?