Not everyone wants XP. Why does anyone would want to use an eight year old OS? RAM is cheap A flash drive may be preferable on a device like this AA batteries are cheap. AA batteries are easy to replace if you run out.
The government can already easily (and cheaply) track your phone calls: they do not need the drivers license. The internet offers a lot of ways to stay anonymous - so governments do not, for example, know who posted a document to wikileaks, or who visited an opposition website through an anonymous proxy.
Physical books also las - I have many that my grandfather bought 60 or seventy years ago. You Kindle ebooks are tied to your Kindle. You are locked into buying new Kindles, and if they ever disappear or become backward incompatible, your entire collection of books disappears - remember Plays for sure? Physical books could survive a collapse of civilisation.
Amazon wants to kill paper books and gain a monopoly on ebooks.
The low prices are are designed to kill off the competition - much like MS offering better deals to OEMs who did not sell BeOS.
I agree ebooks should be cheaper than paper books, but how long do you think they will stay cheaper once Amazon has us all locked into Kindle? How long will you be able to buy books once you only read on a device that has DRM - pay per read or rent by the week is quite possible.
Exactly, unfortunately most people here need to RTFA.
The suggested instructions specifically inform jurors that they are prohibited from using these technologies in the courtroom, in deliberations, or outside the courthouse to communicate about or research cases on which they currently serve, the group stated.
There are a lot of comments below that are obviously by people who did not read that.
On the other hand Sir Roy Meadows got away with giving evidence in court that lead to hundreds of children being wrongly taken away front heir parents because his stupid and negligently given evidence (basically he gave evidence on odds without understanding probability, and gave evidence that specialists disagreed with) was "honestly held".
Going back to autism, the British government also made things worse by what it told parents, which amounted to "do not worry your little heads about it, we know best and are telling you what to do". Their publications said things like "no evidence has been found" without" describing what effort had been made to look for evidence. On the other hand, the Danish study simple produced strong statistical evidence that there was no link, and that was that.
No, GP is quite right. Big businesses just hire a people to sort it out. They are specialists and know exactly what to do and get it down quickly. The regulator gets to know them, which helps as well, and they can afford to takes disputes with regulators to the courts.
I have heard Ted Tuppen, who founded a company that ended up owning about the fifth of the pubs in Britain*, say that there were always free houses (independent pubs) for the chains to buy because the owners could never cope with the paperwork.
*Enerprise Inns, they may have had to shrink a bit post credit crunch.
Ad networks will see the same user agent each time, but you can set it to, for example, IE on Windows, or something else very common. It may mess up ads that serve different ads depending on your browser.
Mozilla have fallen into the classic trap of trying to expand its user base via increasing features, as opposed to keeping its user base by increasing quality.
It works for Microsoft.
We don't need new features directly in Firefox. Plugins do that. Remember that long ago the project made a conscious choice to take a performance hit to provide third-party access into the browser via the elaborate XUL and plugins frameworks, to minimize pushing code and features onto users who don't need them.
It was a minority browser then. Most people do not install plugins, or install very few. Most people do not want to work out which plugins are incompatible with each other. Most people judge a browser by how good it is out of the box.
That said, I have no sympathy for someone that knows their computer has a problem that's causing other people grief.
What about people who do not care enough to find out? That is most people. They do not know, because they do not care.
My solution would be to allow victims to sue anyone who is negligent or the consequences. I think making everyone whose machine is in a botnet jointly and severally liable for all damage would be excessive, but each of them should face a liability big enough to be worth suing over.
As I mentioned in another comment, Moneybookers no longer allows anyone outside the US to sell to the US.
Also, WTF is with the comment on Xoom. First they say the fees are too high (are they still that high, I thought not.) The comes:
On the other side a huge list of shady countries like Bangladesh, the Dominican Republic, Jamaica and Sri Lanka.
Shady countries? Why? I find that very offensive.
Essentially they think that the service is used by people working in developed countries to send money to families on poor countries, and they find this objectionable.
Moneybookers are good, but is closed to Americans because of the difficulties of complying with US anti-gambling laws. It is not a bank, but is regulated by the UK's Financial Services Authority.
Neither Moneybookers nor anyone else has the user base to be a serious alternative, except perhaps Google Checkout.
Without competition Paypal have no reason to change.
1) The police will raid shops if copyright holders make credible allegations that they are selling pirated stuff. 2) Corporate use of pirated copies of Lotus Notes, and Adobes various design apps stopped after they started contacting people and making i clear they would sue. 3) Everyone still open sells pirated Windows and Office, and I mean city centre shops, not markets or anywhere obscure. Even corporate users often pirated copies. Pirated Windows and Office are standard "free" installs in new PCs. 4) MS has offices and a subsidiary company here, and spends on advertising here, including ads on the importance of using "genuine " (shades of ACTA there) Windows
How can you account for that, unless they are deliberately allowing piracy? If they spent a fraction of what they did on advertising on enforcement, piracy rates would plummet.
So, yes, they definitely do enforce selectively to build market share. Of curse, they no doubt plan to do exactly what Adobe did, and start collecting once people are lacked in.
[quote]The International Association for Human Values is a large organization actively doing phenomenal work around the globe with very little overhead, but they are little-known in the US[/quote]
I am not in the US and I have never heard of them either. In fact, looking at the site, it appears to be US based.
Also, the founder is described as a "spiritual leader". Is it a religious organisation - not that there is anything wrong with that, but there is something odd in not mentioning it. If I went to the Caritas website and could not find the word "Catholic" anywhere, I would think that odd too.
Getting back to the original question, I think the counsellor is going to find her skills in much more demand - I am pretty sure I could send out a few emails, and make a few phone calls and find someone who could use her (except that there may be language problems), but I do not know may charities that need a network guy. Something specifically IT might be the best bet - for example the national Linux User Group here does stuff for schools, and someone who can spend a holiday training/trouble shooting/setting stuff up might be useful (I am not in any position to speak for them).
Yes, we all know that the greater resources made available by pooling resources instead of competing leads to better results. Lenin promised it would!
You could also do with reading The Mythical Man Month.
I have never heard anyone credible suggest that MS's problem is their kernel. Everything I have read suggests it is rather good.
You also seem to think that all the other components that make up a lInux distro, apart form the kernel, are badly run. Do you have examples or citations? QT? KDE? GNU utilities? GCC? Gtk? Gnome? xorg? Open Office? What exactly do you think is a bad product because it lacks a "tight grip"?
The problem with having lots of distros is the lack of marketing and deal-making ability.
You have been modded troll, not for knocking Linux, but for commenting out of ignorance, because Slashdot does not have a "clueless idiot" moderation option.
I'm sorry, do you *remember* Netscape 4? IE was a far superior product
Yes, but Opera was better than either at the time, and got nowhere.
And on Macintosh it won the market fair and square, there being no "stranglehold."
Not true: IE4 was bundled with MacOS as the default browser as part of a deal between Apple and MS. The crowds reaction to the announcement this was clearly not what users wanted.
Notice:
1) The cross licensing deal (cross licensing is bad because it blocks new entrants) 2) MS also bought this by promising to keep developing MS Office for Mac (i.e. they were trying to leverage the Office monopoly). 3) MS also bailed Apple put financially as part of the deal: i.e. they actually bought market share for cash.
Are you suggesting that if IE was the single available browser that Firefox wouldn't have been developed?
Yes, because it would have accelerated the move towards IE only sites (which were already common at the time). If losts of websites required ActiveX, VBScript,.NET and whatever else MS would have come up with given a complete monopoly, any other browser would be useless (unless it used IE's rendering engine etc.), and other desktop OSes would be unusable.
The reason is that if someone with a 5% market share offers a product that uses a proprietary protocol I can easily say "no thanks" and move to the next alternative.
If someone has 90% of the market, I may have to use their product to be compatible with everyone else - i.e. because of network effects
I would define a free market to mean that prices are set by supply and demand in a competitive market place. Therefore the existence of a monopolist or cartel would mean that the market is not free.
You could argue, but I notice that people who advocate "free markets" in the sense of "no regulation" are those who think that monopolies and cartels cannot successfully exclude competition.
To put it another way, I define free market to mean the sort of market that Adam Smith advocated, rather than what neo-mercantilism advocates.
I would not want to use a system that required me to do that countless times. I had forgotten about it.
I like having a few unused keys to reassign. I currently have scroll lock starting Krunner (easier than the default Alt-F2).
Lenovo's decision to require an extra key press to use the F* function keys also sucks. I use them much more than the screen brightness etc. keys Lenovo have put in their place - those things are much easier to do with a mouse.
Anything non-standard sucks anyway: it just slows you down when you are on another machine (oops, I just admitted to doing it in the last para, but a user choosing their own settings is different).
My department needed another Bloomberg terminal or two.
Someone found out there was one that was virtually unused (and then only to get info that was available from cheaper sources), even though we were not being given the money to get more.
The reason: they have always had it and it would upset them if it was taken away.
Slashdot Mirror
Upgrading Acrobat Reader on Linux requires no restarts.
IN any case one of the posts you are replying too gave any hint that it was Adobe: they blame MS which implies otherwise.
Not everyone wants XP. Why does anyone would want to use an eight year old OS?
RAM is cheap
A flash drive may be preferable on a device like this
AA batteries are cheap.
AA batteries are easy to replace if you run out.
The government can already easily (and cheaply) track your phone calls: they do not need the drivers license. The internet offers a lot of ways to stay anonymous - so governments do not, for example, know who posted a document to wikileaks, or who visited an opposition website through an anonymous proxy.
Physical books also las - I have many that my grandfather bought 60 or seventy years ago. You Kindle ebooks are tied to your Kindle. You are locked into buying new Kindles, and if they ever disappear or become backward incompatible, your entire collection of books disappears - remember Plays for sure? Physical books could survive a collapse of civilisation.
For once Murdoch has a point.
Amazon wants to kill paper books and gain a monopoly on ebooks.
The low prices are are designed to kill off the competition - much like MS offering better deals to OEMs who did not sell BeOS.
I agree ebooks should be cheaper than paper books, but how long do you think they will stay cheaper once Amazon has us all locked into Kindle? How long will you be able to buy books once you only read on a device that has DRM - pay per read or rent by the week is quite possible.
Exactly, unfortunately most people here need to RTFA.
The suggested instructions specifically inform jurors that they are prohibited from using these technologies in the courtroom, in deliberations, or outside the courthouse to communicate about or research cases on which they currently serve, the group stated.
There are a lot of comments below that are obviously by people who did not read that.
Why are self-signed certificates viewed with such relative suspicion?
Because there is no money in them?
I would prefer either:
1) relying on certs distributed through another channel, or
2) An SSH like system that notified you of changes.
On the other hand Sir Roy Meadows got away with giving evidence in court that lead to hundreds of children being wrongly taken away front heir parents because his stupid and negligently given evidence (basically he gave evidence on odds without understanding probability, and gave evidence that specialists disagreed with) was "honestly held".
Going back to autism, the British government also made things worse by what it told parents, which amounted to "do not worry your little heads about it, we know best and are telling you what to do". Their publications said things like "no evidence has been found" without" describing what effort had been made to look for evidence. On the other hand, the Danish study simple produced strong statistical evidence that there was no link, and that was that.
No, GP is quite right. Big businesses just hire a people to sort it out. They are specialists and know exactly what to do and get it down quickly. The regulator gets to know them, which helps as well, and they can afford to takes disputes with regulators to the courts.
I have heard Ted Tuppen, who founded a company that ended up owning about the fifth of the pubs in Britain*, say that there were always free houses (independent pubs) for the chains to buy because the owners could never cope with the paperwork.
*Enerprise Inns, they may have had to shrink a bit post credit crunch.
Konqueror lets you set user agent per site.
Ad networks will see the same user agent each time, but you can set it to, for example, IE on Windows, or something else very common. It may mess up ads that serve different ads depending on your browser.
Mozilla have fallen into the classic trap of trying to expand its user base via increasing features, as opposed to keeping its user base by increasing quality.
It works for Microsoft.
We don't need new features directly in Firefox. Plugins do that. Remember that long ago the project made a conscious choice to take a performance hit to provide third-party access into the browser via the elaborate XUL and plugins frameworks, to minimize pushing code and features onto users who don't need them.
It was a minority browser then. Most people do not install plugins, or install very few. Most people do not want to work out which plugins are incompatible with each other. Most people judge a browser by how good it is out of the box.
That said, I have no sympathy for someone that knows their computer has a problem that's causing other people grief.
What about people who do not care enough to find out? That is most people. They do not know, because they do not care.
My solution would be to allow victims to sue anyone who is negligent or the consequences. I think making everyone whose machine is in a botnet jointly and severally liable for all damage would be excessive, but each of them should face a liability big enough to be worth suing over.
As I mentioned in another comment, Moneybookers no longer allows anyone outside the US to sell to the US.
Also, WTF is with the comment on Xoom. First they say the fees are too high (are they still that high, I thought not.) The comes:
Shady countries? Why? I find that very offensive.
Essentially they think that the service is used by people working in developed countries to send money to families on poor countries, and they find this objectionable.
The problem is the lack of alternatives.
Moneybookers are good, but is closed to Americans because of the difficulties of complying with US anti-gambling laws. It is not a bank, but is regulated by the UK's Financial Services Authority.
Neither Moneybookers nor anyone else has the user base to be a serious alternative, except perhaps Google Checkout.
Without competition Paypal have no reason to change.
I live in a country where:
1) The police will raid shops if copyright holders make credible allegations that they are selling pirated stuff.
2) Corporate use of pirated copies of Lotus Notes, and Adobes various design apps stopped after they started contacting people and making i clear they would sue.
3) Everyone still open sells pirated Windows and Office, and I mean city centre shops, not markets or anywhere obscure. Even corporate users often pirated copies. Pirated Windows and Office are standard "free" installs in new PCs.
4) MS has offices and a subsidiary company here, and spends on advertising here, including ads on the importance of using "genuine " (shades of ACTA there) Windows
How can you account for that, unless they are deliberately allowing piracy? If they spent a fraction of what they did on advertising on enforcement, piracy rates would plummet.
So, yes, they definitely do enforce selectively to build market share. Of curse, they no doubt plan to do exactly what Adobe did, and start collecting once people are lacked in.
[quote]The International Association for Human Values is a large organization actively doing phenomenal work around the globe with very little overhead, but they are little-known in the US[/quote]
I am not in the US and I have never heard of them either. In fact, looking at the site, it appears to be US based.
Also, the founder is described as a "spiritual leader". Is it a religious organisation - not that there is anything wrong with that, but there is something odd in not mentioning it. If I went to the Caritas website and could not find the word "Catholic" anywhere, I would think that odd too.
Getting back to the original question, I think the counsellor is going to find her skills in much more demand - I am pretty sure I could send out a few emails, and make a few phone calls and find someone who could use her (except that there may be language problems), but I do not know may charities that need a network guy. Something specifically IT might be the best bet - for example the national Linux User Group here does stuff for schools, and someone who can spend a holiday training/trouble shooting/setting stuff up might be useful (I am not in any position to speak for them).
If I wanted to lock down the color settings, how might I do that?
Why would you want to do that?
Yes, we all know that the greater resources made available by pooling resources instead of competing leads to better results. Lenin promised it would!
You could also do with reading The Mythical Man Month.
I have never heard anyone credible suggest that MS's problem is their kernel. Everything I have read suggests it is rather good.
You also seem to think that all the other components that make up a lInux distro, apart form the kernel, are badly run. Do you have examples or citations? QT? KDE? GNU utilities? GCC? Gtk? Gnome? xorg? Open Office? What exactly do you think is a bad product because it lacks a "tight grip"?
The problem with having lots of distros is the lack of marketing and deal-making ability.
You have been modded troll, not for knocking Linux, but for commenting out of ignorance, because Slashdot does not have a "clueless idiot" moderation option.
I'm sorry, do you *remember* Netscape 4? IE was a far superior product
Yes, but Opera was better than either at the time, and got nowhere.
And on Macintosh it won the market fair and square, there being no "stranglehold."
Not true: IE4 was bundled with MacOS as the default browser as part of a deal between Apple and MS. The crowds reaction to the announcement this was clearly not what users wanted.
Notice:
1) The cross licensing deal (cross licensing is bad because it blocks new entrants)
2) MS also bought this by promising to keep developing MS Office for Mac (i.e. they were trying to leverage the Office monopoly).
3) MS also bailed Apple put financially as part of the deal: i.e. they actually bought market share for cash.
Are you suggesting that if IE was the single available browser that Firefox wouldn't have been developed?
Yes, because it would have accelerated the move towards IE only sites (which were already common at the time). If losts of websites required ActiveX, VBScript, .NET and whatever else MS would have come up with given a complete monopoly, any other browser would be useless (unless it used IE's rendering engine etc.), and other desktop OSes would be unusable.
The reason is that if someone with a 5% market share offers a product that uses a proprietary protocol I can easily say "no thanks" and move to the next alternative.
If someone has 90% of the market, I may have to use their product to be compatible with everyone else - i.e. because of network effects
I would define a free market to mean that prices are set by supply and demand in a competitive market place. Therefore the existence of a monopolist or cartel would mean that the market is not free.
You could argue, but I notice that people who advocate "free markets" in the sense of "no regulation" are those who think that monopolies and cartels cannot successfully exclude competition.
To put it another way, I define free market to mean the sort of market that Adam Smith advocated, rather than what neo-mercantilism advocates.
The principal not only could have, but SHOULD have interviewed the student to ascertain the risk.
Why? He had no reason to think that there was any risk.
I would not want to use a system that required me to do that countless times. I had forgotten about it.
I like having a few unused keys to reassign. I currently have scroll lock starting Krunner (easier than the default Alt-F2).
Lenovo's decision to require an extra key press to use the F* function keys also sucks. I use them much more than the screen brightness etc. keys Lenovo have put in their place - those things are much easier to do with a mouse.
Anything non-standard sucks anyway: it just slows you down when you are on another machine (oops, I just admitted to doing it in the last para, but a user choosing their own settings is different).
My department needed another Bloomberg terminal or two.
Someone found out there was one that was virtually unused (and then only to get info that was available from cheaper sources), even though we were not being given the money to get more.
The reason: they have always had it and it would upset them if it was taken away.