Oh, that opens up so many questions. I'll do my own take on the Epicurean riddle:
If a god is omnipotent, then it follows that said god is omniscient. If it thus knows all, then it would come to the quick conclusion that creating natural beings with its morality would relegate itself to obsolescence.
To wit: If a deity is possessed of nothing but righteousness, then we would already have heaven on earth, as there would be no sin. If, however, we do possess the same ethos and moral constructs, then the very presence of sin removes the ability for a deity to be all-compassionate, and so the promise of a blessed afterlife carries no weight. Or, better yet, the afterlife mythos is wrong, and we all return to the ether and dirt upon death. It's thus logical to ask, in all cases: do we still need a deity?
If God is all-capable, why create more than one (possibly flawed) copy with different phenotypes expressing the same "immutable spirit"?
If you're inclined to believing in supernatural origins, then each planet is an ant farm. Nothing more, nothing less.
But it _wasn't_ in stable when it was submitted, and that's the big thing. It was introduced to stable when etch went stable back in February.
If you, like most responsible sysadmins, only ran your production boxes using stable, then any keys generated while running sarge would still be fine. If you did dist-upgrade to etch, THEN made new keys on your now-stable box, then you'd have a problem.
Granted, it's still a fairly major botch-job, but I don't see why everyone's ballyhooing this as "ZOMG 2 YEARS IN PRODUKSHUN!" It was introduced in unstable, floated under the radar in testing, and was just committed to stable a couple months ago.
Running testing or unstable on your production servers is playing with fire. Period. That it was caught within 3 months of being moved to stable helps to put realistic damages in perspective, but I'd still think this should cause serious review of the package maintenance process at Debian.
although they're implemented in a somewhat clunky fashion. Yeah, and last I checked, they don't fall out of scope for GC until end of script execution. That's a pretty big memory hole for any serious usage, so while they're available, they're not practical.
You know, I'd really love to know where you're getting this 1-2 year figure.
They began switching off register_globals() as of PHP 4.2.0, which has been out for just over 6 years. You had to manually go in and enable it in your php.ini, and there were many exclamation marks in the docblocks warning you about how this would be going away and you were damning yourself to deprecation purgatory if you relied on it.
Features like safe_mode, magic_quotes_*, register_globals, and open_basedir have long been known to be security issues and have been kept in BC for almost 7 years now. To state that this was a premature deprecation is fairly insulting.
Only gaiafags bitch about newfags and "/b/ is not your personal army!" incessantly.
The mentality of/i/ is different from that of/b/, and hell, I miss Soviet Russia, sUPERFAGGOT, and most of/z/ for it being what it was. Random, stupid bullshit that wasn't even acceptable in/b/. Try to separate the two.
You bet. This sounds exactly like a false-flag attack to discredit Anonymous. They have already struck back once after Anonymous sandbagged their servers with DDoS and Gigaloader attacks. Co$ has been twisted up since the 2/10 and 3/15 peaceful demonstrations. Now that the/i/nsurgents are under the tutelage of Gregg Hagglund, Tory Christman, and Mark Bunker, it's only going to be a matter of time before OSA kicks it into high gear to start tracking these kids down.
This is just a salvo of an upcoming battle, the likes of which Co$ hasn't ever seen before. So long as Anonymous can remain decentralized and have more than one forum to communicate, this could be interesting to see play out.
The interesting issue that always comes up with independents (who are used to not only writing and performing their music, but actively manufacturing and promoting it as well), is that this mentality comes out: "All I need is big site X, because everyone's heard of it!" With iTunes, you're virtually guaranteed to get buried on the new releases section, and you lose out on a lot of potential fans/consumers because advertising real estate is incredibly limited.
What about, however, sync licensing? Ringtones? OTA downloads? What about exploiting pre-release exclusives? What about getting front-page feature spots? Certainly, the market adjusts when consumers and producers find that happy equilibrium price. When you're dealing with an almost-perfectly inelastic supply curve, this really comes down to consumer preference. There's no reason to preclude iTunes from the overall strategy by going niche-vendor-only. However, considering Cupertino's general reticence toward helping independent distributors to provide content, especially in a DRM-free format, I'd venture that independent artists have even less of a chance of getting this to happen.
From a business standpoint, I'd rather make 60% of something than 100% of nothing. Most digital distributors are dying to find good, new talent, and there are ones specialized in just about every genre you could want. Exclusivity typically comes up for working the distribution, but artists still retain ownership of their masters and publishing rights. Within any genre, there's at least one distro that allows the deal to be terminated by the artist at any given time for dissatisfaction with the service (we're one such). Getting proper distribution (which includes advertisement, feature spots, and maximizing price points within the target demographic) isn't as hard as most artists think.
I'm sure they're intending to, in due time, but it's pretty unorganized in the iTMS camp. Specifically, there's a different label manager for each global region in which you sell your product, and something like this requires a renegotiation/re-signing of the contract for each region. Most of the indie's basically get ignored (last contract we had to sign with them had a ~8-week turnaround from when we mailed it in to confirmation that the manager had even seen it. And that was just for the US). We're realizing more and more that, in order to get any real feature spots, even a niche genre like electronica/dance needs a fulltime iTunes relation manager, because they simply don't care about anyone outside of the Big Four.
Conversely, there are a lot more boutique sites out there which sell better bitrates, without DRM, globally. Turnaround time from initial contract signing to posting content live? Beatport can have you signed on Thursday and putting content live on Tuesday. Even Rhapsody, eMusic, and Napster are easier to work with, and they certainly aren't small by any means.
Until they're willing to play ball, we'll continue to ship them at the very end of the distribution cycle. Fans are willing to pay up to $3/track, and with the artist getting 60% of that, the boutiques serve a better avenue to support the niche. Who would want to sell their music on the digital music version of Walmart?
Even the indie distributors and aggregators (e.g., Ingrooves, Iris, and GrooveSource) aren't getting that deal... and they've been asking for it since Jobs made the initial announcement.
Well, lest we forget, Soviet Russia was a mod there and was one of the worst trolls. He eventually got banned for defecating in his Rice Krispies one too many times.
Debatable. It's undocumented and has not been used once in any currently-existing text. There's also debate that it is 2nd-declension neuter (like pelagus or vulgus), not 4th-declension.
Oh, that's right. None. It's not a concern. How many have attempted to send HTML/CSS emails and have had to work around the mangling that webmails do?
Yes, security is a primary concern, but I'd rather work in an environment where I don't have to deal with phishing. I'll deal with Outlook 2007 murdering my CSS with the Word engine later; it's still preferable to how horrendous.Mac, Gmail, or Hotmail can get re-rendering my messages.
It certainly would seem so. However, my experience has been that HMV isn't so much an issue; getting Caroline to answer the phone to get distribution into Virgin is a much more painstaking task. But I digress.
The long and the short of it is that your typical artist is not as business-savvy as is needed to get in. Nor, really, does he/she have the time to pursue getting the contract, providing the content, or working for exposure within the system. While things like business numbers, UPCs, and ISRCs are simple to apply for, it's usually just as much about knowing what you're looking for as actually going through the process. It also requires being persistent and dedicating full-time work hours to maintaining contact with the content managers on the other end, as the system is still far from perfect and contracts do have a mysterious habit of not getting mailed out (even when you're an aggregator of an acknowledged soft spot in their overall catalog). Average Joe Six-Stringer isn't going to get his calls returned, because he doesn't have the bulk or breadth of catalog to guarantee generating the revenue requirements per quarter.
Can't testify to the non-labels, but from the indie label perspective, it's pretty much a massive PITA to even get on. Contract negotiations, content distribution, proper release placement and advertising... it goes on. The rare artist that is savvy enough to handle the contract negotiation might get on there, but I've yet to come across one.
Look at the contract you sign, before you sign it. That's what it boils down to. If you're advanced X amount for Y number of releases, then you're obligated to provide it within the timeframe provided in the language of the document you sign.
Indie labels provide you more flexibility, but the option of a direct buy-out vs. a P&D is always present. Even if you sign for a P&D deal, it's often the label owner's prerogative to retain distribution rights for Z years before you regain all P&D rights to the track that you, the hungry artist, are eventually entitled to.
Don't like it? Don't sign it. Find you an indie label that will press your stuff, use the Internet to its fullest for your advertising and PR campaign, and cut out as much of the middleman as possible. I can tell you from the label group I work for, of the 40+ labels we have signed, about 10 or 11 are successful on a consistent, per-release basis. These are the labels we've set up specifically for artists who are not only hungry, but smart. They take an active role as AR and promote all the works in addition to what the distribution company does for promotion (and these artists produce 90% of the content on these labels). If you want to give the finger to The Man, be prepared to go 110% into the business aspect of it to do all the promotion work. It's not easy, but it can be done.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's just say it: all the *chan boards.
Rest in peace, Raymond Cocteau.
Any technology based off a Stallone movie already has the brain damage built in.
(And for the stupid mods in the crowd, yes, I checked the UIDs. Someone's been on a 3-year sabbatical and hasn't readjusted to
Oh, that opens up so many questions. I'll do my own take on the Epicurean riddle:
If a god is omnipotent, then it follows that said god is omniscient. If it thus knows all, then it would come to the quick conclusion that creating natural beings with its morality would relegate itself to obsolescence.
To wit: If a deity is possessed of nothing but righteousness, then we would already have heaven on earth, as there would be no sin. If, however, we do possess the same ethos and moral constructs, then the very presence of sin removes the ability for a deity to be all-compassionate, and so the promise of a blessed afterlife carries no weight. Or, better yet, the afterlife mythos is wrong, and we all return to the ether and dirt upon death. It's thus logical to ask, in all cases: do we still need a deity?
If God is all-capable, why create more than one (possibly flawed) copy with different phenotypes expressing the same "immutable spirit"?
If you're inclined to believing in supernatural origins, then each planet is an ant farm. Nothing more, nothing less.
But it _wasn't_ in stable when it was submitted, and that's the big thing. It was introduced to stable when etch went stable back in February.
If you, like most responsible sysadmins, only ran your production boxes using stable, then any keys generated while running sarge would still be fine. If you did dist-upgrade to etch, THEN made new keys on your now-stable box, then you'd have a problem.
Granted, it's still a fairly major botch-job, but I don't see why everyone's ballyhooing this as "ZOMG 2 YEARS IN PRODUKSHUN!" It was introduced in unstable, floated under the radar in testing, and was just committed to stable a couple months ago.
Running testing or unstable on your production servers is playing with fire. Period. That it was caught within 3 months of being moved to stable helps to put realistic damages in perspective, but I'd still think this should cause serious review of the package maintenance process at Debian.
You know, I'd really love to know where you're getting this 1-2 year figure.
They began switching off register_globals() as of PHP 4.2.0, which has been out for just over 6 years. You had to manually go in and enable it in your php.ini, and there were many exclamation marks in the docblocks warning you about how this would be going away and you were damning yourself to deprecation purgatory if you relied on it.
Hell, they discontinued support on PHP4 at the beginning of the year.
Features like safe_mode, magic_quotes_*, register_globals, and open_basedir have long been known to be security issues and have been kept in BC for almost 7 years now. To state that this was a premature deprecation is fairly insulting.
Oh, but we already are!
Only gaiafags bitch about newfags and "/b/ is not your personal army!" incessantly.
/i/ is different from that of /b/, and hell, I miss Soviet Russia, sUPERFAGGOT, and most of /z/ for it being what it was. Random, stupid bullshit that wasn't even acceptable in /b/. Try to separate the two.
The mentality of
You bet. This sounds exactly like a false-flag attack to discredit Anonymous. They have already struck back once after Anonymous sandbagged their servers with DDoS and Gigaloader attacks. Co$ has been twisted up since the 2/10 and 3/15 peaceful demonstrations. Now that the /i/nsurgents are under the tutelage of Gregg Hagglund, Tory Christman, and Mark Bunker, it's only going to be a matter of time before OSA kicks it into high gear to start tracking these kids down.
This is just a salvo of an upcoming battle, the likes of which Co$ hasn't ever seen before. So long as Anonymous can remain decentralized and have more than one forum to communicate, this could be interesting to see play out.
DASU?! kekeke
The interesting issue that always comes up with independents (who are used to not only writing and performing their music, but actively manufacturing and promoting it as well), is that this mentality comes out: "All I need is big site X, because everyone's heard of it!" With iTunes, you're virtually guaranteed to get buried on the new releases section, and you lose out on a lot of potential fans/consumers because advertising real estate is incredibly limited.
What about, however, sync licensing? Ringtones? OTA downloads? What about exploiting pre-release exclusives? What about getting front-page feature spots? Certainly, the market adjusts when consumers and producers find that happy equilibrium price. When you're dealing with an almost-perfectly inelastic supply curve, this really comes down to consumer preference. There's no reason to preclude iTunes from the overall strategy by going niche-vendor-only. However, considering Cupertino's general reticence toward helping independent distributors to provide content, especially in a DRM-free format, I'd venture that independent artists have even less of a chance of getting this to happen.
From a business standpoint, I'd rather make 60% of something than 100% of nothing. Most digital distributors are dying to find good, new talent, and there are ones specialized in just about every genre you could want. Exclusivity typically comes up for working the distribution, but artists still retain ownership of their masters and publishing rights. Within any genre, there's at least one distro that allows the deal to be terminated by the artist at any given time for dissatisfaction with the service (we're one such). Getting proper distribution (which includes advertisement, feature spots, and maximizing price points within the target demographic) isn't as hard as most artists think.
I'm sure they're intending to, in due time, but it's pretty unorganized in the iTMS camp. Specifically, there's a different label manager for each global region in which you sell your product, and something like this requires a renegotiation/re-signing of the contract for each region. Most of the indie's basically get ignored (last contract we had to sign with them had a ~8-week turnaround from when we mailed it in to confirmation that the manager had even seen it. And that was just for the US). We're realizing more and more that, in order to get any real feature spots, even a niche genre like electronica/dance needs a fulltime iTunes relation manager, because they simply don't care about anyone outside of the Big Four.
Conversely, there are a lot more boutique sites out there which sell better bitrates, without DRM, globally. Turnaround time from initial contract signing to posting content live? Beatport can have you signed on Thursday and putting content live on Tuesday. Even Rhapsody, eMusic, and Napster are easier to work with, and they certainly aren't small by any means.
Until they're willing to play ball, we'll continue to ship them at the very end of the distribution cycle. Fans are willing to pay up to $3/track, and with the artist getting 60% of that, the boutiques serve a better avenue to support the niche. Who would want to sell their music on the digital music version of Walmart?
Even the indie distributors and aggregators (e.g., Ingrooves, Iris, and GrooveSource) aren't getting that deal... and they've been asking for it since Jobs made the initial announcement.
Well, lest we forget, Soviet Russia was a mod there and was one of the worst trolls. He eventually got banned for defecating in his Rice Krispies one too many times.
Debatable. It's undocumented and has not been used once in any currently-existing text. There's also debate that it is 2nd-declension neuter (like pelagus or vulgus), not 4th-declension.
How many local clients have major XSS issues?
.Mac, Gmail, or Hotmail can get re-rendering my messages.
Oh, that's right. None. It's not a concern. How many have attempted to send HTML/CSS emails and have had to work around the mangling that webmails do?
Yes, security is a primary concern, but I'd rather work in an environment where I don't have to deal with phishing. I'll deal with Outlook 2007 murdering my CSS with the Word engine later; it's still preferable to how horrendous
Isn't creation of brainless bodies the sole task of the bar exam?
What, you aren't already?.
I'm 24.
You're still a moron.
I read this and thought of cycling.
Guess I must still be new here.
It certainly would seem so. However, my experience has been that HMV isn't so much an issue; getting Caroline to answer the phone to get distribution into Virgin is a much more painstaking task. But I digress.
The long and the short of it is that your typical artist is not as business-savvy as is needed to get in. Nor, really, does he/she have the time to pursue getting the contract, providing the content, or working for exposure within the system. While things like business numbers, UPCs, and ISRCs are simple to apply for, it's usually just as much about knowing what you're looking for as actually going through the process. It also requires being persistent and dedicating full-time work hours to maintaining contact with the content managers on the other end, as the system is still far from perfect and contracts do have a mysterious habit of not getting mailed out (even when you're an aggregator of an acknowledged soft spot in their overall catalog). Average Joe Six-Stringer isn't going to get his calls returned, because he doesn't have the bulk or breadth of catalog to guarantee generating the revenue requirements per quarter.
Can't testify to the non-labels, but from the indie label perspective, it's pretty much a massive PITA to even get on. Contract negotiations, content distribution, proper release placement and advertising... it goes on. The rare artist that is savvy enough to handle the contract negotiation might get on there, but I've yet to come across one.
Look at the contract you sign, before you sign it. That's what it boils down to. If you're advanced X amount for Y number of releases, then you're obligated to provide it within the timeframe provided in the language of the document you sign.
Indie labels provide you more flexibility, but the option of a direct buy-out vs. a P&D is always present. Even if you sign for a P&D deal, it's often the label owner's prerogative to retain distribution rights for Z years before you regain all P&D rights to the track that you, the hungry artist, are eventually entitled to.
Don't like it? Don't sign it. Find you an indie label that will press your stuff, use the Internet to its fullest for your advertising and PR campaign, and cut out as much of the middleman as possible. I can tell you from the label group I work for, of the 40+ labels we have signed, about 10 or 11 are successful on a consistent, per-release basis. These are the labels we've set up specifically for artists who are not only hungry, but smart. They take an active role as AR and promote all the works in addition to what the distribution company does for promotion (and these artists produce 90% of the content on these labels). If you want to give the finger to The Man, be prepared to go 110% into the business aspect of it to do all the promotion work. It's not easy, but it can be done.