Anything that is going to start dying after it gets used a (relatively fixed) certain number of times is not something people are generally going to be interested in.
That's actually true of any technology. Entropy is a bitch, isn't it? It's even true of current information storage devices on a short lifespan. How many people have lost data from a HD crash? This technology will likely be used as a third storage teir, mostly for fast startup times, etc. Put in 5 gigs of the stuff and let it act like a disk cache + hibernate cache. The computer can shut off completely when not in use, and come back almost instantly.
The point is that consumers really won't to choose between mram and pram. Just like they haven't chosen between SDRAM, DDR, and DDR2. That's a minor technical point as it's all abstracted away. It'd be like worrying about the "format war" between fuel injection and carborators. A few people might care about that kind of thing, but for the vast majority it's irrelevant.
The format war would take place with manufacturers and memory producers. Consumers will likely never install pram or mram into their computers just like they don't install flash now. The only time you might buy pram would be a USB flash device, and that already has the standard interface of USB. So really there's no reason consumers would ever have to choose one technology pathway or another. Manufacturers would have to choose, but they're much better prepared to switch technologies and avoid having dead-end technology (they really do this all the time when it makes economic sense).
Unfortunately, attitudes like that are the exact reason that spam continues to get worse and worse. The reason it's so bad is because smtp is so broken and free-flowing. You should care about my opinon because I'm a sysadmin at an ISP
Gee.. how did I possibly guess that? You're the hard-ass sysadmin that needs to control everything, and you get all uppity when you can't. Being a sysadmin is about managing risk, not control.
Me running my own SMTP server has exactly zero impact on spam. I don't run an open relay, I run secure updated machines, and I don't get viruses. I bet if you checked the ToS, it does prohibit servers.
Bzzzzt. But thanks for playing.. We do use a couple different dial-up list RBLs, though, and it helps a lot. I can grep the mail server logs and get some numbers if you don't believe me.
Even if this works to some degree, I still think outright blocking is always a bad idea. There's probbably going to be almost no one running an SMTP server on dialup, but I also can't believe there's really much spam coming from a dialup modem either.
Mail should NOT be coming from end-user dynamic IPs directly. Period. No excuses.
Blah blah blah.. Frankly I don't care about your opinion. It matters to me about as much as what ice cream you prefer. There's no law that says I can't run my own SMTP server on my own internet connection. As far as your universal terms of service, they aren't so universal. Most ISPs prohibit spamming, but there's plenty that have no problem with running a SMTP server on your ip address. If my ISP starts whining about it, I'll go elsewhere.
it, however should still pass it's traffic directly to your ISP's smarthost for onward delivery.
And why would I want to have to rely on my ISPs mailserver to be up to send outgoing mail? I like reliability, I don't like outages. I also don't want to rely on them to route my mail properly, decide I'm a spammer and block me, or whatever. Also, why would I want to make it easier for my ISP to snoop on my mail? (who knows if they'll send targeted advertising, etc).
If you don't mind all those things, fine. But there's very good reasons to not use your ISPs mailserver.
If you do this, and you're an ISP (which you likely are if you're getting 1000s of spams a minute) you're very likely to block legit mail from ever getting to subscribers. Realtime Blacklists aren't reliable enough to use alone in blocking spam. You'd serve customers better by buying more/faster machines to handle the load.
If you DO decide to do this, be VERY carefull about the RBLs you use. Some RBLs list entire blocks of IP addresses of ISPs that have hosted spammers, and some even list every DSL/Cable modem static IP address. I've had me mail blocked by overzealous ISPs before (for just being on a cable modem static IP), so I'm not a big fan of using RBLs or other simple techniques to block spam at the postfix/sendmail level.
Fact: If humanity is going to survive, we have to get off this rock.
I'm really tired of this argument. While technically it's true, it's not as if the sun is going to expand into a red giant tommorow. If your goal is the survival of humanity, there's a lot better places you can put money than manned space exploration.
We could start with developing the poorest of the poor nations. Simple things like water and roads would go a long way. We could also put a lot more money into eradicating diseases like Malaria and TB. Also, given the times, sending people to the moon and mars is something that could be used to rally people together.
Sure, for about 5 minutes. It sure worked well back in the 60s and early 70s when the US landed on the moon. Right after we landed on the moon it just brought everyone together and everyone forgot about things like Vietnam, civil rights, and drugs. The 70s were a true golden age of wealth, peace, economic development, and low inflation. Oh, and did I tell you about this swanky bridge I have to sell you in Florida situated in some lovely swamp land?
How can you make this argument with a straight face? Frankly the Chinese would be the type to land on the moon and start mining for resources and say: "Screw the moon treaty, what are you going to do about it?
Someone must have just modded this wrong. You simply HAVE to be joking. There's nothing really valueable on the moon to mine. Maybe He-3 might be valueable some day if we ever manage to get fusion power working, but not now. Also, if there was profit to be made on the moon which country do you think would be the first to exploit it? I'll give you a hint, it ryhmes with benited straits.
What I don't understand is why ISP's can't send me an email every few days listing the subject lines and senders of everything they've blocked, with a link to click on to retrieve the blocked messages
Because ISPs don't block IP blocks because they're trying to protect you from spam. They block IP blocks because they're trying to reduce the load on their incoming mail server (and save costs). Implementing a system that tags spam and sends you subject lines would cost money.
The real problem is that email is seen as a loss leader. Everyone expects an ISP to provide email, but they can't charge really anything for it as it's become a commodity. Thus many ISPs try to chince out and provide the bare minimum service. Basically if you want good email service sign up with a service that only does email. I run my own mail server, but I've had good luck with fastmail.fm. Let the ISP provide internet connectivity only and let someone that knows how to do email provide email service.
In any cliche to be "part of the group" you need to be interested in what they're interested in. That's probbably going to vary even in different workplaces. It doesn't always have to be something specific, but can often be just having similar world views. If you can't be interested in at least some of the same things the group is interested in, you may never be part of "the group". Don't try to fake it, it's way too obvious when you do. If they all go out to lunch, get yourself invited along. If they meet after work and drink, try to get invited along. Start slowly, listen a lot and try to contribute to conversation. Don't get all offended if they start talking about porn-stars or fart jokes. There's still some people that may not accept you, but then that's always the case no matter what gender you are. As long you're in with "the collective", you're fine.
Maybe you won't be interested in being part of "the group" because you aren't interested in the same things. That's fine, try to develop friendships with individuals then. People have widely different interests outside of a cliche.
But not for the reasons you might think. The natural reaction is that it's too impersonal. That's really the least of the problems. The big problem with email is that it's not reliable, and not very official. What's to stop someone sending out a prank notice to non-fired rad-shack employees that says they're fired? Maybe you don't like the rad-shack guy you work with (and you've already been fired), so you send out a fake email to him with headers that look like it comes from rad-shack and the same body as yours. How's your (former) co-worker going to know he wasn't actually fired?
Email isn't reliable either. There's no guarantee that people read their email on a regular basis, and even if they did spam filters can filter out an email like this.
You have absolutely no clue about how much I value human life.
Let's see.. comparing product testing to raping children, check. Not caring about people going blind from unsafe cosmetics, check. Thinking most people are "ignorant assholes", check. I'd say you've made a good case for not caring about human life.
What a lot of people do is look at the price of the inkjet, look at the slightly higher price of the laser, and pick the inkjet "because it has color and is cheaper". Then they run into ink hell, and figure that's just the way it all works.
Personally I've never bought an inkjet because I've always thought the technology sucked. I now have a used HP LJ 4 I got for $20, and bought a toner cartridge for $50 and replaced all the rollers/pickups. It runs like a champ and since I do light printing I expect it to last as long as I care to own it. Like you I might eventually upgrade to a used color laser, but only if it's really cheap as I don't really care about color.
I know it hurts to accept that you're one of the bad guys, but if you can't life with the things you do, just stop doing them.
Sorry, I can perfectly accept the testing of products on animals. Personally I'd refuse to buy any products that AREN'T tested on animals because I think they're unsafe. Maybe you're the one that is unable to accept that not everyone has the same value system as you do. I really don't care if you don't buy cosmetics that are/aren't tested on animals. You on the other hand want to force your values on others. It reminds me of the fundamentalists who want to ban abortion, the morning after pill, and contraception. We all don't find so little value for human life as you do.
Listen buddy, you made the comparison, now live with it. Trying to weasel out of it once you realize how stupid you are just makes you look like a fool.
Why is it so far fetched to find these assholes guilty of contributory arson, or whatever the equivilent would be?
Because these are totally different issues we're talking about here. Napster et al was directly involved in the trade of pirated music. They knew it, they directly produced the software that did it, end of story.
It's a lot harder to prove a link between the animal rights terrorists and the head of the organizations. These are loosely knit organizations and the actions of its members aren't necessarily connected to the organization itself. To do that you need hard evidence that the organization knows about, and is helping these kind of actions to happen. That involves the same kind of stuff that the FBI uses against organized crime. Snitches inside the organization, wiretapping, plea agreements, and following the money.
If they don't know, then it's not "obviously safe" and should be canned.
The strange thing about science is you don't know the answers ahead of time. There's no back of the book to look the "obviously safe" chemicals up in. Your solution essentially amounts to people making bets based on the limited knowledge that's available at the time. But I also think that the majority of people are ignorant assholes.
Thank you for confirming my theory that animal rights activists are really just people who don't like humans very much, and substitute cute animals in their place. It explains a lot why you put animals before humans. I'll pick humans over bunnies when there's similar interests at stake. Like "eat the animal or starve myself". But that is not the case in "torture the fluffy bunny or use a different brand of eyeliner".
Ahh.. the standard testing=torture logic twisting. Please see common definition of torture. As far as picking "another brand of eyeliner", the "not tested on animals" cosmetics are still tested, they're just tested on you. That's fine by me, as long as there's choice just like abortion. No one is forcing you get an abortion or use animal tested products. But in the same sense no one should force companies to stop making sure products are safe because people like you happen to think bunnies are real cute.
How are members of the mafia terrorists? Terrorists are interested in political or ideological goals. The mafia just wants to make money without regard to the law or ethics. By that definition the makers of Phen-Fen are terrorists too.
Or, perhaps, if they are not obviously safe (generating enough paid volunteers) they should just not be produced at all?
Err.. how does someone know if something is "obviously safe"? Oh I know.. "natural" things are obviously safe like Anthrax and Bufotoxin. You think it's ok to torture other creatures so that you can look a little bit prettier? If so I believe your priorities are seriously mixed up.
And if you think that people are going to stop their primary instict of attracting mates because a few mice or bunnies were hurt in the process, you've sense of reality is seriously wrong. Sorry, but I'll pick the humans over the bunnies every time.
Here is the thing, why don't these nuts go after the people who test for cosmetic companies first. At least they have no excuse for testing on animals.
I guess I always thought that not making someone go blind from your new eyeliner was a pretty good excuse to test on animals. I guess people like yourself prefer these products are tested on humans first.
All they need to do, thanks to the PATRIOT Act, is label them as "enemy combatents" or terrorists and make them disappear.
While I certainly oppose the Patriot act, it doesn't go this far. GTMO is allowed to exist because the "enemy combatents" aren't US citizens, so they aren't guaranteed the rights of a US citizen under the law. Personally I think this is horrible and un-American. But it's not accurate to say that the Patriot act has removed the right to a fair trial and due process. What most people take issue with the Patriot act is it's provisions to expand the rights of search and seizure (notably seizing library records without warrants).
A few liters of heavy water would be pretty useless in creating a heavy water moderated nuclear reactor. You'd need thousands of gallons of the stuff for doing something like that. Anyone ordering even a hundred gallons of heavy water would be under very quick scrutiny.
Is why these groups are allowed to continue to exist.
The government would have to prove that leaders in the organization were directly involved in supporting the actions of some of its members. Look at organized crime as an example. The FBI worked very hard for many years to get prosecutions of the leaders of the mob. There would have to be a similar concerted effort to take down these animal rights people.
Didn't you read Animal Farm in high school? It's been clearly stated by the pigs that while all are animals are equal, some animals are more equal than others. Sheesh.. try to keep up with us for a change.
Slashdot Mirror
Anything that is going to start dying after it gets used a (relatively fixed) certain number of times is not something people are generally going to be interested in.
That's actually true of any technology. Entropy is a bitch, isn't it? It's even true of current information storage devices on a short lifespan. How many people have lost data from a HD crash? This technology will likely be used as a third storage teir, mostly for fast startup times, etc. Put in 5 gigs of the stuff and let it act like a disk cache + hibernate cache. The computer can shut off completely when not in use, and come back almost instantly.
The point is that consumers really won't to choose between mram and pram. Just like they haven't chosen between SDRAM, DDR, and DDR2. That's a minor technical point as it's all abstracted away. It'd be like worrying about the "format war" between fuel injection and carborators. A few people might care about that kind of thing, but for the vast majority it's irrelevant.
The format war would take place with manufacturers and memory producers. Consumers will likely never install pram or mram into their computers just like they don't install flash now. The only time you might buy pram would be a USB flash device, and that already has the standard interface of USB. So really there's no reason consumers would ever have to choose one technology pathway or another. Manufacturers would have to choose, but they're much better prepared to switch technologies and avoid having dead-end technology (they really do this all the time when it makes economic sense).
Unfortunately, attitudes like that are the exact reason that spam continues to get worse and worse. The reason it's so bad is because smtp is so broken and free-flowing. You should care about my opinon because I'm a sysadmin at an ISP
Gee.. how did I possibly guess that? You're the hard-ass sysadmin that needs to control everything, and you get all uppity when you can't. Being a sysadmin is about managing risk, not control.
Me running my own SMTP server has exactly zero impact on spam. I don't run an open relay, I run secure updated machines, and I don't get viruses.
I bet if you checked the ToS, it does prohibit servers.
Bzzzzt. But thanks for playing..
We do use a couple different dial-up list RBLs, though, and it helps a lot. I can grep the mail server logs and get some numbers if you don't believe me.
Even if this works to some degree, I still think outright blocking is always a bad idea. There's probbably going to be almost no one running an SMTP server on dialup, but I also can't believe there's really much spam coming from a dialup modem either.
Mail should NOT be coming from end-user dynamic IPs directly. Period. No excuses.
Blah blah blah.. Frankly I don't care about your opinion. It matters to me about as much as what ice cream you prefer. There's no law that says I can't run my own SMTP server on my own internet connection. As far as your universal terms of service, they aren't so universal. Most ISPs prohibit spamming, but there's plenty that have no problem with running a SMTP server on your ip address. If my ISP starts whining about it, I'll go elsewhere.
it, however should still pass it's traffic directly to your ISP's smarthost for onward delivery.
And why would I want to have to rely on my ISPs mailserver to be up to send outgoing mail? I like reliability, I don't like outages. I also don't want to rely on them to route my mail properly, decide I'm a spammer and block me, or whatever. Also, why would I want to make it easier for my ISP to snoop on my mail? (who knows if they'll send targeted advertising, etc).
If you don't mind all those things, fine. But there's very good reasons to not use your ISPs mailserver.
If you do this, and you're an ISP (which you likely are if you're getting 1000s of spams a minute) you're very likely to block legit mail from ever getting to subscribers. Realtime Blacklists aren't reliable enough to use alone in blocking spam. You'd serve customers better by buying more/faster machines to handle the load.
If you DO decide to do this, be VERY carefull about the RBLs you use. Some RBLs list entire blocks of IP addresses of ISPs that have hosted spammers, and some even list every DSL/Cable modem static IP address. I've had me mail blocked by overzealous ISPs before (for just being on a cable modem static IP), so I'm not a big fan of using RBLs or other simple techniques to block spam at the postfix/sendmail level.
Fact: If humanity is going to survive, we have to get off this rock.
I'm really tired of this argument. While technically it's true, it's not as if the sun is going to expand into a red giant tommorow. If your goal is the survival of humanity, there's a lot better places you can put money than manned space exploration.
We could start with developing the poorest of the poor nations. Simple things like water and roads would go a long way. We could also put a lot more money into eradicating diseases like Malaria and TB.
Also, given the times, sending people to the moon and mars is something that could be used to rally people together.
Sure, for about 5 minutes. It sure worked well back in the 60s and early 70s when the US landed on the moon. Right after we landed on the moon it just brought everyone together and everyone forgot about things like Vietnam, civil rights, and drugs. The 70s were a true golden age of wealth, peace, economic development, and low inflation. Oh, and did I tell you about this swanky bridge I have to sell you in Florida situated in some lovely swamp land?
How can you make this argument with a straight face?
Frankly the Chinese would be the type to land on the moon and start mining for resources and say: "Screw the moon treaty, what are you going to do about it?
Someone must have just modded this wrong. You simply HAVE to be joking. There's nothing really valueable on the moon to mine. Maybe He-3 might be valueable some day if we ever manage to get fusion power working, but not now. Also, if there was profit to be made on the moon which country do you think would be the first to exploit it? I'll give you a hint, it ryhmes with benited straits.
whatever
What I don't understand is why ISP's can't send me an email every few days listing the subject lines and senders of everything they've blocked, with a link to click on to retrieve the blocked messages
Because ISPs don't block IP blocks because they're trying to protect you from spam. They block IP blocks because they're trying to reduce the load on their incoming mail server (and save costs). Implementing a system that tags spam and sends you subject lines would cost money.
The real problem is that email is seen as a loss leader. Everyone expects an ISP to provide email, but they can't charge really anything for it as it's become a commodity. Thus many ISPs try to chince out and provide the bare minimum service. Basically if you want good email service sign up with a service that only does email. I run my own mail server, but I've had good luck with fastmail.fm. Let the ISP provide internet connectivity only and let someone that knows how to do email provide email service.
In any cliche to be "part of the group" you need to be interested in what they're interested in. That's probbably going to vary even in different workplaces. It doesn't always have to be something specific, but can often be just having similar world views. If you can't be interested in at least some of the same things the group is interested in, you may never be part of "the group". Don't try to fake it, it's way too obvious when you do. If they all go out to lunch, get yourself invited along. If they meet after work and drink, try to get invited along. Start slowly, listen a lot and try to contribute to conversation. Don't get all offended if they start talking about porn-stars or fart jokes. There's still some people that may not accept you, but then that's always the case no matter what gender you are. As long you're in with "the collective", you're fine.
Maybe you won't be interested in being part of "the group" because you aren't interested in the same things. That's fine, try to develop friendships with individuals then. People have widely different interests outside of a cliche.
But not for the reasons you might think. The natural reaction is that it's too impersonal. That's really the least of the problems. The big problem with email is that it's not reliable, and not very official. What's to stop someone sending out a prank notice to non-fired rad-shack employees that says they're fired? Maybe you don't like the rad-shack guy you work with (and you've already been fired), so you send out a fake email to him with headers that look like it comes from rad-shack and the same body as yours. How's your (former) co-worker going to know he wasn't actually fired?
Email isn't reliable either. There's no guarantee that people read their email on a regular basis, and even if they did spam filters can filter out an email like this.
You have absolutely no clue about how much I value human life.
Let's see.. comparing product testing to raping children, check. Not caring about people going blind from unsafe cosmetics, check. Thinking most people are "ignorant assholes", check. I'd say you've made a good case for not caring about human life.
What a lot of people do is look at the price of the inkjet, look at the slightly higher price of the laser, and pick the inkjet "because it has color and is cheaper". Then they run into ink hell, and figure that's just the way it all works.
Personally I've never bought an inkjet because I've always thought the technology sucked. I now have a used HP LJ 4 I got for $20, and bought a toner cartridge for $50 and replaced all the rollers/pickups. It runs like a champ and since I do light printing I expect it to last as long as I care to own it. Like you I might eventually upgrade to a used color laser, but only if it's really cheap as I don't really care about color.
I know it hurts to accept that you're one of the bad guys, but if you can't life with the things you do, just stop doing them.
Sorry, I can perfectly accept the testing of products on animals. Personally I'd refuse to buy any products that AREN'T tested on animals because I think they're unsafe. Maybe you're the one that is unable to accept that not everyone has the same value system as you do. I really don't care if you don't buy cosmetics that are/aren't tested on animals. You on the other hand want to force your values on others. It reminds me of the fundamentalists who want to ban abortion, the morning after pill, and contraception. We all don't find so little value for human life as you do.
Listen buddy, you made the comparison, now live with it. Trying to weasel out of it once you realize how stupid you are just makes you look like a fool.
How about fucking little kids? Is that fine with you too, as long as there's choice? No one is forcing you to fuck children
It escapes me the kind of twisted mind that you must have to compare animal testing to raping children on a moral basis.
Why is it so far fetched to find these assholes guilty of contributory arson, or whatever the equivilent would be?
Because these are totally different issues we're talking about here. Napster et al was directly involved in the trade of pirated music. They knew it, they directly produced the software that did it, end of story.
It's a lot harder to prove a link between the animal rights terrorists and the head of the organizations. These are loosely knit organizations and the actions of its members aren't necessarily connected to the organization itself. To do that you need hard evidence that the organization knows about, and is helping these kind of actions to happen. That involves the same kind of stuff that the FBI uses against organized crime. Snitches inside the organization, wiretapping, plea agreements, and following the money.
If they don't know, then it's not "obviously safe" and should be canned.
The strange thing about science is you don't know the answers ahead of time. There's no back of the book to look the "obviously safe" chemicals up in. Your solution essentially amounts to people making bets based on the limited knowledge that's available at the time.
But I also think that the majority of people are ignorant assholes.
Thank you for confirming my theory that animal rights activists are really just people who don't like humans very much, and substitute cute animals in their place. It explains a lot why you put animals before humans.
I'll pick humans over bunnies when there's similar interests at stake. Like "eat the animal or starve myself". But that is not the case in "torture the fluffy bunny or use a different brand of eyeliner".
Ahh.. the standard testing=torture logic twisting. Please see common definition of torture. As far as picking "another brand of eyeliner", the "not tested on animals" cosmetics are still tested, they're just tested on you. That's fine by me, as long as there's choice just like abortion. No one is forcing you get an abortion or use animal tested products. But in the same sense no one should force companies to stop making sure products are safe because people like you happen to think bunnies are real cute.
or the mafia
How are members of the mafia terrorists? Terrorists are interested in political or ideological goals. The mafia just wants to make money without regard to the law or ethics. By that definition the makers of Phen-Fen are terrorists too.
Or, perhaps, if they are not obviously safe (generating enough paid volunteers) they should just not be produced at all?
Err.. how does someone know if something is "obviously safe"? Oh I know.. "natural" things are obviously safe like Anthrax and Bufotoxin.
You think it's ok to torture other creatures so that you can look a little bit prettier? If so I believe your priorities are seriously mixed up.
And if you think that people are going to stop their primary instict of attracting mates because a few mice or bunnies were hurt in the process, you've sense of reality is seriously wrong. Sorry, but I'll pick the humans over the bunnies every time.
Here is the thing, why don't these nuts go after the people who test for cosmetic companies first. At least they have no excuse for testing on animals.
I guess I always thought that not making someone go blind from your new eyeliner was a pretty good excuse to test on animals. I guess people like yourself prefer these products are tested on humans first.
All they need to do, thanks to the PATRIOT Act, is label them as "enemy combatents" or terrorists and make them disappear.
While I certainly oppose the Patriot act, it doesn't go this far. GTMO is allowed to exist because the "enemy combatents" aren't US citizens, so they aren't guaranteed the rights of a US citizen under the law. Personally I think this is horrible and un-American. But it's not accurate to say that the Patriot act has removed the right to a fair trial and due process. What most people take issue with the Patriot act is it's provisions to expand the rights of search and seizure (notably seizing library records without warrants).
A few liters of heavy water would be pretty useless in creating a heavy water moderated nuclear reactor. You'd need thousands of gallons of the stuff for doing something like that. Anyone ordering even a hundred gallons of heavy water would be under very quick scrutiny.
Is why these groups are allowed to continue to exist.
The government would have to prove that leaders in the organization were directly involved in supporting the actions of some of its members. Look at organized crime as an example. The FBI worked very hard for many years to get prosecutions of the leaders of the mob. There would have to be a similar concerted effort to take down these animal rights people.
I don't get it. Aren't humans "animals", too?
Didn't you read Animal Farm in high school? It's been clearly stated by the pigs that while all are animals are equal, some animals are more equal than others. Sheesh.. try to keep up with us for a change.