Prepare it yourself by buying a thick steak or roast, washing it throughly, then quickly searing it on all sides.
This will kill off all (or at least nearly all) E.Coli contamination - which is only on the exterior of the meat. Then trim off the cooked parts and grind or chop the interior raw meat into your steak tartare.
Even then, I wouldn't feed it to children or anyone with a compromised immune system.
(If you want to avoid the cooking and trimming steps, you might try marinating the whole cut in Everclear, or Bacardi 180 Rum, which should work as pretty effective 'edible' disinfectant. Do this after you have thouroughly washed it water - and then patted it dry, though. The left over Everclear marinade could then be mixed with Tomato Juice, Worcestershire Sauce, and Tabasco and served in a "steak tartare flavored" "Bloody Mary" to accompany the entree.)
Yes, E.coli has gotten a bad rap because a couple of its strains (like 0157 and 0111) have caused terrible outbreaks of conditions MUCH worse than diarhea, including death of children and total organ failure. But most variants of E.coli (named for MC Escher because of its capability of rolling into a ball like a creature in one of Escher's drawings) are perfectly harmless or even beneficial* to our normal digestive process.
If anything the blame for the outbreaks lies with the meat processors who slaughter cattle in unsanitary ways that allows the contents of the gut to get mixed with the meat we eat. When this happens with steak, it really doesn't have much of an effect since the interior of the steak is never exposed to the E.coli and the exterior is cooked. But when a gut-splattered beef is left unwashed and then ground into hamburger - there is a chance that the interior of a hamburger will not be cooked to a temperature high enough to kill the E.coli (hambugers should never be served rare).
* there is current research being done to try and overwhelm 0157 in cattle by colonizing their tract with just beneficial strains. But this implies the meat processors aren't going to ficx the problem the right way by getting the sh!t out of our food in the first place.
There is only so much of the Geek Movie Dollar(tm) to go around, especially to be spent at the theatre itself. Going up against LotR 2T was just too much of a challenge.
It was also a very competitive holiday movie market for sequels in general with Harry Potter and James Bond also releasing new franchise entries.
at this point, not enough spam is coming in that format to me (meaning "none") for me to worry too much about it.
I'm surprised by you not getting SPAM in that format since I get it all the time, of course there is a good chance that the spammer is including enough text in the message that the ones you are getting are being caught by the filter.
FYI, trying to find an example in my Yahoo based account I use for spam-at-risk correspondence, I see that they have now added an option to not display embedded images in email by default - if you select that option on your email preferences page. After changing to that option, I find that most of the spam in my inbox all looks the same with a big empty space where an image would normally be embeded in an HTML table, followed by some fine print that says "if the image doesn't display on your screen CLICK HERE" and then by "If you would like to unsubscribe from [insert name of spamming service du jour here] then please send an email to this address (or paint a big fat target on your chest and try storming Saddam's Palace - which is the most certain way to avoid future spam).
Unless the recipient is expecting this they should just delete the message. I routinely delete any email that has zipped attachments unless I have previously agreed with the sender to send it that way. (That's assuming the recipients mailserver doesn't routinely strip zip files off as an enterprise virus protection measure in the first place.)
But one way your suggestion could be modified that will work for anyone whose email can view HTML is to print your message to graphic file, convert it to a GIF and embed it into a simple a webpage.
The reader will open the file and see what looks like a text message, but it actually will be the GIF image of your message.
More interesting (to me anyway), is the text of the actual letter to the Scots' Magazine which can be found here.
Both describe the system as using individual wires to which would be electrified using the spark from a Leyden jar, and depending on which wire you electrified, you would know which letter was being represented. Much of the decription could be used to credit CM with the invetnion of the telephone pole as well, since he/she describes how the wires would need to be suspended and insulated at the suspension points.
Curious though, is that it was originally identified as means for transmitting intelligence, yet the plan for constructing it was published in a magazine - an early proponent of Open Source I guess.
The second link also indicates that work on electric was performed as early as 1746 coinciding with the invention of the Leyden Jar itself, so I think the current Scotsman article may be a bit biased when it claims this CM is the real inventor of electric telegraphy. And that in the 1780's a system was proposed that would have used either a 5-bit or 6-bit 'binary' system for sending the signals over fewer wires - by having different combinations of wires signal each character (ie 00001 = A, 00010 = B, 00011 = C, etc.)
Similarly, just by mimicking the signal of the military radar you could launch a Denial of Service attack against anyone trying to use Wi-Fi.
It would seem this compromise results in a serious trade-off of National security versus the security of the users' own systems. It could end up being a nasty tool for industrial sabotage if you could shut down networking at competitor's facility from a van parked outside. As a result, it could limit the acceptance of Wi-Fi as a replaced for wired LANs - and keep it as a mobile only technology.
(I know a lot of supposition went into that, but heck, I'm only posting to SlashDot).
i live in a suburb just north of dallas, from about march-november we see thunder about once a week on average.
WOW! I've never seen thunder in my life. Could you describe what it looks like?
a couple of the girls i told this to believed it,.... telling them my dad worked on the original mamogram/soft tissue imaging systems helped with my credibility considerably. a good, fairly original line that will get you far:)
So how successful was this to convince them that you were also an expert at performing manual breast exams, and they should let you demonstrate on them?
Re:If you REALLY want to buy the book
on
XML and Perl
·
· Score: 1
But if people are interested in getting a good price rather than putting a commission into your pocket (and contributing to a company that abuses software patents),
They can't really abuse the patent, they can only take advantage of it. If you want to boycott anyone over their one-click patent, boycott the US government that issued them the patent. If you think the patent was issued in error, then provided the prior art to discredit the patent....they should order it from Bookpool [bookpool.com] instead, for $3 less than Amazon.
Except that unless you buy another book to get over BookPool's $40 Free Shipping threshhold you will just be paying that $3 to UPS instead of me and the Perl Development Fund. Amazon's Free Shipping threshhold of $25 falls conveniently just under their price for the book.
If you REALLY want to buy the book
on
XML and Perl
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
Then maybe you should get it from Amazon, where it is $12 cheaper.
Please Rob, explain to us how whatever deal you have with bn.com is worth your user base overpaying by so much? Users can buy the book through the link above, and I will put a third of my affiliate commission (about $1.40 per copy) towards Perl development projects. This way everybody wins. Using your link, I assume you win, and that bn wins, but your loyal user base is out an additional $12 and I can't imagine your deal with bn.com nets you that much for providing the link.
Netscape did support frames for a while at that time.
Here is a link to 1995 Usenet post on the Netscape frames feature. My question is, why isn't AOL screaming their head off over this patent? If anyone could have patented it, it likely would have been Netscape.
Also note that the linked text clearly refers to scripting as another added feature of the new browser, so that version had both frames and dynamic content, implying that the SBC patent should have been denied for obviousness even if no prior art can be tracked down.
I would bet that this limit is to make it harder for people tape movies in the theater.
I think your right, but you have to admit that it is an even easier copy-protection scheme to get around than CSS. All that is required is to sit through the movie twice then splice the clips together. WHich shelling out an additional $9. Yes it might keep the film off the street (and IRC) for a few extra hours, but it hardly seems worth the lost additional revenue of customers who won't buy the camera due to the time limit.
All of the submit comments links I have tried just dump me back to the regulations.gov homepage. Were you able to get the link to really work? I got the impression some must be working as someone noted there was a 4,000 character limit.
Depending on the time available in advance, you could consider rolling your own distro that would allow the pictures & vids to be added then burned.
Ideally guests would leave with a bootable distro on CD where the backgrounds and screensavers would be from the wedding itself. The one drawback is the potential that some guests have Macs.
Friends of mine filled the wedding hall with all sorts of family photos and photos of the time since they got together, but of course the guests couldn't take these home with them. With advance planning these could be scanned and added to the Distro/picture CD.
The part I was most interested in was the dissenting opinion. here is the limited info on the dissent included in the AP styory
Justices John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer disagreed with their colleagues.
Stevens wrote that the court was "failing to protect the public interest in free access to the products of inventive and artistic genius."The case is Eldred v. Ashcroft, 01-618.
And here is the opening of Stevens' actual dissent
Writing for a unanimous Court in 1964, Justice Black stated that it is obvious that a State could not "extend the life of a patent beyond its expiration date," Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co., 376 U. S. 225, 231 (1964).1 As I shall explain, the reasons why a State may not extend the life of a patent apply to Congress as well. If Congress may not expand the scope of a patent monopoly, it also may not extend the life of a copyright beyond its expiration date. Accordingly, insofar as the 1998 Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act, 112 Stat. 2827, purported to extend the life of unexpired copyrights, it is invalid.
My concern is that we are really undergoing an experiment at the hands of Congress and the Corporate copyright holders. For two centuries the US prospered with a reasonable period of copyright. Now the question is will this essentially unlimited copyright that the SCOTUS has determined can be continually extended, will corporations and the country continue to propser. Were it not for the success of new mediums such as film, radio, video, and the Internet the US would not be a major force in the world economy I would think the Japanese who certainly exceed our capapbilities in the technological realm would be ahead of us.
But now companies will no longer be able to get a jump start in launching new media as they won't have unrestricted access to what has come bnefore on other media which they can modify. Disney made several attempts at re-creating themselves into a Internet centric company and failed miserably. Time-Warner gave up on trying to transform themselves and were bought out by an Internet company. That leaves NBC which has signed over its Internet present to MS, and CBS that has yet to show the same kind of success it had first in Radio and then in TV.
Though it too is occasionally added more to provide tartness (or sometime preservation) than as a vitamin supplement. It definately is not the same thing as citric acid. You might want to find out whether or not your HS Science teacher was actually qualified to teach Chemistry, or if they were just a Gym teacher pressed into filling the Science Teacher shortage.
The better thing to do would be to keep all your sensitive data on another disk and remove that from your computer.
Yeah, that is probably best keep the old disk in your new machine and keep copies of critical data on both disks, plus on any external storage media of choice.
That is actually what I do myself, but then again, I've never brough a PC in for repair since I do tech support professionally myself.
Yes, you data does carry liability, but you can remove all risk by backing up before the work is done.
Except that if your computer worked well enough to perform a backup, then why are you taking it into the shop in the first place?
I'd recommend keeping an extra disk on hand from old machine but that is still compatible with your current hardware. If your machine breaks down swap in the old disk and make them fix it with that disk in place - instead of the disk that has your live data.
Another significant reason to do this (and IMHO another ripe area for regulation) is that you aren't giving the guy in the repair shop access to your data which potentially could have trade secrets, software still in development, your pr0n collection, your stock portfolio, who knows what else that the tech could then use to blackmail you with making public or otherwise profit from.
Just give him your machine with the swapped in old disk formatted with just the base OS.
The title being not news, people can see about a dozen novae & supernovae from the Earth every year, the interesting fact is that you might be able to see it with the naked eye.
But the biggest problem is that what we would see would not be an explosion but an implosion of matter which will release huge quantities of light and other radiation.
Shouldn't it be relativly easy set up a fake server/transparent proxy and/or doing a kind of man-in-the-middle attack to make your own "premium" service? I mean, it doesn't sound like it's encrypted on the transport layer?
Well certainly it could still be using some sort of encryption regardless of what port it using. Can someone that owns put sniffer on port 80 and find out what what is coming back down the pipe especially during the handshake phase when it is requesting a new track to play?
But what would be the point if it already offers the PC-Link feature? It seems like it would be much easier to trick that inot using your PC as a proxy to get to other sites on the web - ut maybe that is why it only works with Windows based software.
When "selected locations" includes anywhere that Amazon delivers in the US, I don't think they are being particularly selective.
Yes, they may be hard get on the international space station, in war zones, and maybe in polar regions, but other than that you just need to have someone trans-ship it for you.
Third, consider this: There are a number of other potential buyers for this type of product: from High Schools or local School Districts, to small-to-medium hometown newspapers, local radio or TV stations (that are not owned by someone HUGE.) that offer their news online, Catholic Diocesan newspapers... virtually *any* organization that creates a printed newspaper and/or offers a news product on the web.
In fact even that is limiting, as there are also sorts of organization that produce news-like publications. Most decent sized non-profits have some sort of newsletter (heck, even my fraternity in college hada an internal newsletter). Also, any organization that uses a collaboritve effort to produce a text product might be able to benefit.
I work for an audit organization and our work consists largely of drafting workpapers, reviewing documents created internally and externally, drafting a report - revising the draft, and issuing a final report based on comments from those who read the draft. (I often think of my job as analogous to a journalist, though on a longer deadline.) There are proprietary solutions to help auditors manage their documents, but I don't find them very satisfactory and since they are closed source they can't be tweaked to accomaodate the ideosyncracies of my organization.
I don't mind SlashDot having a financial incentive to provide links to the book at bn.com (I have an incentive to have you buy it through the above link), but what I fail to see is why they would want to see the SlashDot users consistently overcharged for tech books. SlashDot should sell its books through whatever site that can offer the lowest price, and compensate them fairly for providing the link. If they are against Amazon because of their stance on Intellectual Property, then they should make that clear as the reason for linking to BN.
Slashdot Mirror
Could you be more specific where you found that system for $750? Walmart has it for $988 - though that includes the MS tax.
Or *his* SlashDot Account for that matter?
and what about "steak tartare"? ;-)
Prepare it yourself by buying a thick steak or roast, washing it throughly, then quickly searing it on all sides.
This will kill off all (or at least nearly all) E.Coli contamination - which is only on the exterior of the meat. Then trim off the cooked parts and grind or chop the interior raw meat into your steak tartare.
Even then, I wouldn't feed it to children or anyone with a compromised immune system.
(If you want to avoid the cooking and trimming steps, you might try marinating the whole cut in Everclear, or Bacardi 180 Rum, which should work as pretty effective 'edible' disinfectant. Do this after you have thouroughly washed it water - and then patted it dry, though. The left over Everclear marinade could then be mixed with Tomato Juice, Worcestershire Sauce, and Tabasco and served in a "steak tartare flavored" "Bloody Mary" to accompany the entree.)
Yes, E.coli has gotten a bad rap because a couple of its strains (like 0157 and 0111) have caused terrible outbreaks of conditions MUCH worse than diarhea, including death of children and total organ failure. But most variants of E.coli (named for MC Escher because of its capability of rolling into a ball like a creature in one of Escher's drawings) are perfectly harmless or even beneficial* to our normal digestive process.
If anything the blame for the outbreaks lies with the meat processors who slaughter cattle in unsanitary ways that allows the contents of the gut to get mixed with the meat we eat. When this happens with steak, it really doesn't have much of an effect since the interior of the steak is never exposed to the E.coli and the exterior is cooked. But when a gut-splattered beef is left unwashed and then ground into hamburger - there is a chance that the interior of a hamburger will not be cooked to a temperature high enough to kill the E.coli (hambugers should never be served rare).
* there is current research being done to try and overwhelm 0157 in cattle by colonizing their tract with just beneficial strains. But this implies the meat processors aren't going to ficx the problem the right way by getting the sh!t out of our food in the first place.
Sorry, make that TOWERS.
There is only so much of the Geek Movie Dollar(tm) to go around, especially to be spent at the theatre itself. Going up against LotR 2T was just too much of a challenge.
It was also a very competitive holiday movie market for sequels in general with Harry Potter and James Bond also releasing new franchise entries.
at this point, not enough spam is coming in that format to me (meaning "none") for me to worry too much about it.
I'm surprised by you not getting SPAM in that format since I get it all the time, of course there is a good chance that the spammer is including enough text in the message that the ones you are getting are being caught by the filter.
FYI, trying to find an example in my Yahoo based account I use for spam-at-risk correspondence, I see that they have now added an option to not display embedded images in email by default - if you select that option on your email preferences page. After changing to that option, I find that most of the spam in my inbox all looks the same with a big empty space where an image would normally be embeded in an HTML table, followed by some fine print that says "if the image doesn't display on your screen CLICK HERE" and then by "If you would like to unsubscribe from [insert name of spamming service du jour here] then please send an email to this address (or paint a big fat target on your chest and try storming Saddam's Palace - which is the most certain way to avoid future spam).
create a text file [&] zip it
Unless the recipient is expecting this they should just delete the message. I routinely delete any email that has zipped attachments unless I have previously agreed with the sender to send it that way. (That's assuming the recipients mailserver doesn't routinely strip zip files off as an enterprise virus protection measure in the first place.)
But one way your suggestion could be modified that will work for anyone whose email can view HTML is to print your message to graphic file, convert it to a GIF and embed it into a simple a webpage.
The reader will open the file and see what looks like a text message, but it actually will be the GIF image of your message.
Most filters don't block HTML and GIF files.
This link to an online book on the history of the Telegraph has a similar (identical?) account.
More interesting (to me anyway), is the text of the actual letter to the Scots' Magazine which can be found here.
Both describe the system as using individual wires to which would be electrified using the spark from a Leyden jar, and depending on which wire you electrified, you would know which letter was being represented. Much of the decription could be used to credit CM with the invetnion of the telephone pole as well, since he/she describes how the wires would need to be suspended and insulated at the suspension points.
Curious though, is that it was originally identified as means for transmitting intelligence, yet the plan for constructing it was published in a magazine - an early proponent of Open Source I guess.
The second link also indicates that work on electric was performed as early as 1746 coinciding with the invention of the Leyden Jar itself, so I think the current Scotsman article may be a bit biased when it claims this CM is the real inventor of electric telegraphy. And that in the 1780's a system was proposed that would have used either a 5-bit or 6-bit 'binary' system for sending the signals over fewer wires - by having different combinations of wires signal each character (ie 00001 = A, 00010 = B, 00011 = C, etc.)
With detectors comes jammers
Similarly, just by mimicking the signal of the military radar you could launch a Denial of Service attack against anyone trying to use Wi-Fi.
It would seem this compromise results in a serious trade-off of National security versus the security of the users' own systems. It could end up being a nasty tool for industrial sabotage if you could shut down networking at competitor's facility from a van parked outside. As a result, it could limit the acceptance of Wi-Fi as a replaced for wired LANs - and keep it as a mobile only technology.
(I know a lot of supposition went into that, but heck, I'm only posting to SlashDot).
i live in a suburb just north of dallas, from about march-november we see thunder about once a week on average.
.... telling them my dad worked on the original mamogram/soft tissue imaging systems helped with my credibility considerably. a good, fairly original line that will get you far :)
WOW! I've never seen thunder in my life. Could you describe what it looks like?
a couple of the girls i told this to believed it,
So how successful was this to convince them that you were also an expert at performing manual breast exams, and they should let you demonstrate on them?
But if people are interested in getting a good price rather than putting a commission into your pocket (and contributing to a company that abuses software patents),
...they should order it from Bookpool [bookpool.com] instead, for $3 less than Amazon.
They can't really abuse the patent, they can only take advantage of it. If you want to boycott anyone over their one-click patent, boycott the US government that issued them the patent. If you think the patent was issued in error, then provided the prior art to discredit the patent.
Except that unless you buy another book to get over BookPool's $40 Free Shipping threshhold you will just be paying that $3 to UPS instead of me and the Perl Development Fund. Amazon's Free Shipping threshhold of $25 falls conveniently just under their price for the book.
Then maybe you should get it from Amazon, where it is $12 cheaper.
Please Rob, explain to us how whatever deal you have with bn.com is worth your user base overpaying by so much? Users can buy the book through the link above, and I will put a third of my affiliate commission (about $1.40 per copy) towards Perl development projects. This way everybody wins. Using your link, I assume you win, and that bn wins, but your loyal user base is out an additional $12 and I can't imagine your deal with bn.com nets you that much for providing the link.
Netscape did support frames for a while at that time.
Here is a link to 1995 Usenet post on the Netscape frames feature. My question is, why isn't AOL screaming their head off over this patent? If anyone could have patented it, it likely would have been Netscape.
Also note that the linked text clearly refers to scripting as another added feature of the new browser, so that version had both frames and dynamic content, implying that the SBC patent should have been denied for obviousness even if no prior art can be tracked down.
I would bet that this limit is to make it harder for people tape movies in the theater.
I think your right, but you have to admit that it is an even easier copy-protection scheme to get around than CSS. All that is required is to sit through the movie twice then splice the clips together. WHich shelling out an additional $9. Yes it might keep the film off the street (and IRC) for a few extra hours, but it hardly seems worth the lost additional revenue of customers who won't buy the camera due to the time limit.
All of the submit comments links I have tried just dump me back to the regulations.gov homepage. Were you able to get the link to really work? I got the impression some must be working as someone noted there was a 4,000 character limit.
Depending on the time available in advance, you could consider rolling your own distro that would allow the pictures & vids to be added then burned.
Ideally guests would leave with a bootable distro on CD where the backgrounds and screensavers would be from the wedding itself. The one drawback is the potential that some guests have Macs.
Friends of mine filled the wedding hall with all sorts of family photos and photos of the time since they got together, but of course the guests couldn't take these home with them. With advance planning these could be scanned and added to the Distro/picture CD.
You can also now pull the story off your favorite AP source.
The part I was most interested in was the dissenting opinion. here is the limited info on the dissent included in the AP styory And here is the opening of Stevens' actual dissentMy concern is that we are really undergoing an experiment at the hands of Congress and the Corporate copyright holders. For two centuries the US prospered with a reasonable period of copyright. Now the question is will this essentially unlimited copyright that the SCOTUS has determined can be continually extended, will corporations and the country continue to propser. Were it not for the success of new mediums such as film, radio, video, and the Internet the US would not be a major force in the world economy I would think the Japanese who certainly exceed our capapbilities in the technological realm would be ahead of us.
But now companies will no longer be able to get a jump start in launching new media as they won't have unrestricted access to what has come bnefore on other media which they can modify. Disney made several attempts at re-creating themselves into a Internet centric company and failed miserably. Time-Warner gave up on trying to transform themselves and were bought out by an Internet company. That leaves NBC which has signed over its Internet present to MS, and CBS that has yet to show the same kind of success it had first in Radio and then in TV.
going back to high school chemistry, vitamin C is citric acid,
I think you mean ascorbic acid.
Though it too is occasionally added more to provide tartness (or sometime preservation) than as a vitamin supplement. It definately is not the same thing as citric acid. You might want to find out whether or not your HS Science teacher was actually qualified to teach Chemistry, or if they were just a Gym teacher pressed into filling the Science Teacher shortage.
The better thing to do would be to keep all your sensitive data on another disk and remove that from your computer.
Yeah, that is probably best keep the old disk in your new machine and keep copies of critical data on both disks, plus on any external storage media of choice.
That is actually what I do myself, but then again, I've never brough a PC in for repair since I do tech support professionally myself.
Yes, you data does carry liability, but you can remove all risk by backing up before the work is done.
Except that if your computer worked well enough to perform a backup, then why are you taking it into the shop in the first place?
I'd recommend keeping an extra disk on hand from old machine but that is still compatible with your current hardware. If your machine breaks down swap in the old disk and make them fix it with that disk in place - instead of the disk that has your live data.
Another significant reason to do this (and IMHO another ripe area for regulation) is that you aren't giving the guy in the repair shop access to your data which potentially could have trade secrets, software still in development, your pr0n collection, your stock portfolio, who knows what else that the tech could then use to blackmail you with making public or otherwise profit from.
Just give him your machine with the swapped in old disk formatted with just the base OS.
Yes the write-up needs lots of work.
The title being not news, people can see about a dozen novae & supernovae from the Earth every year, the interesting fact is that you might be able to see it with the naked eye.
But the biggest problem is that what we would see would not be an explosion but an implosion of matter which will release huge quantities of light and other radiation.
Shouldn't it be relativly easy set up a fake server/transparent proxy and/or doing a kind of man-in-the-middle attack to make your own "premium" service? I mean, it doesn't sound like it's encrypted on the transport layer?
Well certainly it could still be using some sort of encryption regardless of what port it using. Can someone that owns put sniffer on port 80 and find out what what is coming back down the pipe especially during the handshake phase when it is requesting a new track to play?
But what would be the point if it already offers the PC-Link feature? It seems like it would be much easier to trick that inot using your PC as a proxy to get to other sites on the web - ut maybe that is why it only works with Windows based software.
When "selected locations" includes anywhere that Amazon delivers in the US, I don't think they are being particularly selective.
Yes, they may be hard get on the international space station, in war zones, and maybe in polar regions, but other than that you just need to have someone trans-ship it for you.
Third, consider this: There are a number of other potential buyers for this type of product: from High Schools or local School Districts, to small-to-medium hometown newspapers, local radio or TV stations (that are not owned by someone HUGE.) that offer their news online, Catholic Diocesan newspapers... virtually *any* organization that creates a printed newspaper and/or offers a news product on the web.
In fact even that is limiting, as there are also sorts of organization that produce news-like publications. Most decent sized non-profits have some sort of newsletter (heck, even my fraternity in college hada an internal newsletter). Also, any organization that uses a collaboritve effort to produce a text product might be able to benefit.
I work for an audit organization and our work consists largely of drafting workpapers, reviewing documents created internally and externally, drafting a report - revising the draft, and issuing a final report based on comments from those who read the draft. (I often think of my job as analogous to a journalist, though on a longer deadline.) There are proprietary solutions to help auditors manage their documents, but I don't find them very satisfactory and since they are closed source they can't be tweaked to accomaodate the ideosyncracies of my organization.
If David did not convince you otherwise, you can purchase Hacking Linux Exposed, Second Edition from bn.com.
Or you could get it for $5 less from here.
I don't mind SlashDot having a financial incentive to provide links to the book at bn.com (I have an incentive to have you buy it through the above link), but what I fail to see is why they would want to see the SlashDot users consistently overcharged for tech books. SlashDot should sell its books through whatever site that can offer the lowest price, and compensate them fairly for providing the link. If they are against Amazon because of their stance on Intellectual Property, then they should make that clear as the reason for linking to BN.