Note to staff: The thing about April 1st jokes is that they should be subtle enough to catch the reader unawares. There's nothing subtle or clever about a constant slew of joke stories, most of which wouldn't fool even my PHB. Consider trying for a ratio of about 5 real stories to 1 "fool" story next year.
Note 2: Some countries are no longer in "fool" time and as a consequence, I was able to see this "news" article for what it was quite clearly!
Thanks for remembering that! Very very funny. I couldn't remember anything he said myself -- all I could remember were the visuals of him with a pointy ears waggling and saying something along the lines of "I am not Spock! I am an actor".. or some such. Anyway.... weren't the spitting image team mean!:D
I don't doubt what you're saying, and I'm not particularly clued up on music players, but can't iRiver products be re-flashed with OGG compatible firmware? And if so, then either its a compromised OGG implementation that plays poorly, _or_ the iRiver hardware is over specified for its intended role of playing MP3/WMA files.
All of which seems to imply that the reason for a lack of OGG support may simply be a lack of consumer demand. A music player manufacture absolutely must support MP3, and probably WMA. I guess OGG just represents additional development costs and maybe they feel there's a legal risk also?
But you *can't* fix them! Those bits use proprietry MS code. What MS is saying is that anyone _could_ hook into their code, and therefore, arguments that IE is tightly integrated with the OS are rubish.
But the counter argument being made here is that, yes, Mozilla (for example) could integrate with these MS "features", but doing so would result in an insecure browser.... so probably not a good idea.
I'd venture that MS can't _un-integrate_ them from IE because and bunch of other code (from MS office to Encarta) depends on this functionality.
And I'd further venture that the "..get them fixed.." idea has occured to MS but that this isn't easy to do due to poor design.
The "update" downloaded fine for me... but all it does it download the complete 1.0.2 installer and run that! You might as well just download that from here, and then *uninstall* your existing version before you install the new one. No biggie if you don't uninstall first, but you'll end up with the older version still in the Windows Add/remove programs list.
Why don't they just go private and get advertising funds like everyone else?
Well, the funny thing is, I do really like the way the BBC operates and I like the way it does give (for the most part) unbiased opinion.
The only thing I do object to is being forced to pay for something regardless on the threat of a large fine (or prison apparently, although I didn't think it'd go that far... they must've been watching all the TV channels at once!).
I think that in the same way that the British people pay through income tax for the NHS, and education, then if we believe that good quality news, current affairs and informational programming is important, then we should pay for it through taxation. I would be happy with that.
It would've been circa '96/'97 when my friend was caught out. He would've been polite but it was in a fairly affluent area of Lond in a particularly nice bit of London and he does come across as very middle class so it might well have been a clash of personalities!!
That might well have been an unofficial and unsanctioned action, but officials are human beings too and respond to both aggression and politeness the same as you or I.
Hmmm. I don't know if they have to meet any targets, but the individual I encountered was not a particularly nice person IMHO. He tried playing the nicey-nicey chappy, just here to have a look around, no bother honest, "oh, have you got a TV" type approach, but seemed a little underhand. Once I'd just said nope to his request to have a look around he came across much much less friendly.
It is a staggering amount of money. If you're an employee and you've never had to deal with being an employer/accountant, then you may not appreciate how high the employers costs are and why they screw so much when people are off sick/take long much breaks.
For example, employers also pay national insurance for employees (yeah, I know employees pay this too) but for employers, it isn't even capped!
Oh, add stamp-duty (for non-UK folks, thats taxing on buying property which given the cost of property in the UK, means each house move costs serval £K more) which adds loads to the gvrnmnt coffers!
And fuel tax. That one must generate a few extra quid for el-Tony + crew.
Not that I mean to rant or anything. I understand taxation is required, but I can't help but wonder exactly what they do with all this money... it truely is a massively, humongous amount of money!!
TV licensing can't... but the last I heard (on a usenet group... so it must be true!) was that when they first turn up, if you tell them to go away, then they have to do that. However, they can then get a warrent and *I believe*, on their next visit they arrive escorted presumably by police. Or maybe lawyers.
Whatever, I have personally had them arrive for a first visit and when I said they couldn't some in, the guy gave me a look like "I know you're guilty" and said something like "Right! Ok" like he was going to find out if I had a TV one way or another.
I think when the guy arrived, I had about 2 weeks left in the flat I was in, so I wasn't going to pay for a new licence then. And luckily they didn't turn up again before I left so I can't confirm what they do next.
Oh, other disinformation I have heard on usenet is that if on their first visit they find you *do* have a TV setup for reception, then they give you the chance to pay your licence. Nope. Friend of mine let them in, they saw the TV set working, and they hit them with the £1000 fine or court case thing. Hence, thats why I wouldn't let them past the door!
Aside from the fact that I thing its absolutely rediculous to be forced to pay simply for owning the equipment, I also hate the fact that no one (and I mean, no one) knows exactly what the rules are. Can you own a set, but just not have an aerial? Can it have a TV tunner that is de-tuned? No one knows, and because of the uncertainty, most people will pay.
Not that the BBC isn't worth the money, but I just object to not really having much choice in the matter!
In the 1980's some time there was a UK magazine that had a cover mounted flexi-disk thing with a ZX Spectrum game on it. If memory serves, it was a Thompson Twins (as in the 1980's band) adventure game (as in text).
I also seem to recall I could never get it to load!
Honestly, you young'uns -- there's nothing new! I'm just waiting for the/. article on playing vynl mp3's on an iPod... or perhaps a vPod... no? ok!
According to a previous thread, companies can avoid being delisted as long as they have some kind of business plan to get things sorted.... but since SCO seem to be missing one of those it would seem that the end is very close.
As for your "dirty bomb" statement, yeah, give it a try. Start by walking into a nuclear power plant, past the six layers of security. Then enter the core, ignoring the fatal dose of radiation you'll be bathed in. Grab hold of a few dozen pebbles, ignoring the heat that burns the flesh off your hands and arms. Take them home. Grind them up, again, ignore the fact that the fumes of the uranium or plutonium are among the most powerful and fastest acting poisons known to man. Use fluorine (a controlled substance also instantly fatal if breathed) to create UF6 to separate the Uranium from the graphite gas...... blah blah blah...
Yeah, way to go cowboy - tell everyone how to do it!
(Note to moderators: the above comment is meant in jest. Okay? Good!)
Note however that Xerox isn't a universal name for a photo copier. In the UK we "photo copy" something. We understand using the name Xerox in place of photo-copy, but we don't use it.
We do often use the name Hoover (a brand name of a vacum cleaner in the UK. Not sure if they were available in the US) in place of vacum cleaner though... although that name might be fading these days.
So would it be better if government agencies requested that office products support an existing open document standard, such as the one used by OOo? That would seem a safer route!
However - many developers I know believe that dev machines don't merit the same kind of hardening as production machines. "Hey! We're behind the firewall, we're safe!"
I'm not justifying what they're doing, but if they're behind a firewall then shouldn't they be safe from this worm? Surely the people getting infected are the people with MySQL ports open directly on the int0rweb *and* no hardening.
There's the problem, though: how do you access MySQL without using their client library (short of some lame shell-script hack)?
I am sooo not a lawyer, but I'd guess that here, although you are using their code in that you're compiling it into your own software, you are not extending it... you're just building on top of their API?
But yeah, the distinction is not massively clear so I don't know if that leaves you open to problems on a legal front.
As others have said, the blog itself should be fine since its only the comments that should have the rel=nofollow on them. I also imagine that this is only really needed for *unmoderated* comment, where moderated content is not likely to contain spam. Can anyone confirm if Six Apart provides for this distinction?
It may, but it really helps for folks who use Windows and want to run a local copy of their database for development purposes.
Myself, I'm absolutely thrilled wiht this new release (and indeed, their new website -- the old one did look a bit naff). I expect PostGreSQL's popularity to increase a fair bit this year, and good luck to them!
Slashdot Mirror
Note to staff: The thing about April 1st jokes is that they should be subtle enough to catch the reader unawares. There's nothing subtle or clever about a constant slew of joke stories, most of which wouldn't fool even my PHB. Consider trying for a ratio of about 5 real stories to 1 "fool" story next year.
Note 2: Some countries are no longer in "fool" time and as a consequence, I was able to see this "news" article for what it was quite clearly!
Thanks for remembering that! Very very funny. I couldn't remember anything he said myself -- all I could remember were the visuals of him with a pointy ears waggling and saying something along the lines of "I am not Spock! I am an actor".. or some such. Anyway.... weren't the spitting image team mean! :D
See, this simple, classic plot solves the BBC's dilema with Dr Who quite neatly!
;-)
Yeah... but its a bit obvious though, init?!
I don't doubt what you're saying, and I'm not particularly clued up on music players, but can't iRiver products be re-flashed with OGG compatible firmware? And if so, then either its a compromised OGG implementation that plays poorly, _or_ the iRiver hardware is over specified for its intended role of playing MP3/WMA files.
All of which seems to imply that the reason for a lack of OGG support may simply be a lack of consumer demand. A music player manufacture absolutely must support MP3, and probably WMA. I guess OGG just represents additional development costs and maybe they feel there's a legal risk also?
The solution would seem to be to bundle it with a Linux compatible modem/router.
Or just give up.
But you *can't* fix them! Those bits use proprietry MS code. What MS is saying is that anyone _could_ hook into their code, and therefore, arguments that IE is tightly integrated with the OS are rubish.
But the counter argument being made here is that, yes, Mozilla (for example) could integrate with these MS "features", but doing so would result in an insecure browser.... so probably not a good idea.
I'd venture that MS can't _un-integrate_ them from IE because and bunch of other code (from MS office to Encarta) depends on this functionality.
And I'd further venture that the "..get them fixed.." idea has occured to MS but that this isn't easy to do due to poor design.
And hasn't that been the argument all along?!
The "update" downloaded fine for me... but all it does it download the complete 1.0.2 installer and run that! You might as well just download that from here, and then *uninstall* your existing version before you install the new one. No biggie if you don't uninstall first, but you'll end up with the older version still in the Windows Add/remove programs list.
Why don't they just go private and get advertising funds like everyone else?
Well, the funny thing is, I do really like the way the BBC operates and I like the way it does give (for the most part) unbiased opinion.
The only thing I do object to is being forced to pay for something regardless on the threat of a large fine (or prison apparently, although I didn't think it'd go that far... they must've been watching all the TV channels at once!).
I think that in the same way that the British people pay through income tax for the NHS, and education, then if we believe that good quality news, current affairs and informational programming is important, then we should pay for it through taxation. I would be happy with that.
It would've been circa '96/'97 when my friend was caught out. He would've been polite but it was in a fairly affluent area of Lond in a particularly nice bit of London and he does come across as very middle class so it might well have been a clash of personalities!!
That might well have been an unofficial and unsanctioned action, but officials are human beings too and respond to both aggression and politeness the same as you or I.
Hmmm. I don't know if they have to meet any targets, but the individual I encountered was not a particularly nice person IMHO. He tried playing the nicey-nicey chappy, just here to have a look around, no bother honest, "oh, have you got a TV" type approach, but seemed a little underhand. Once I'd just said nope to his request to have a look around he came across much much less friendly.
It is a staggering amount of money. If you're an employee and you've never had to deal with being an employer/accountant, then you may not appreciate how high the employers costs are and why they screw so much when people are off sick/take long much breaks.
For example, employers also pay national insurance for employees (yeah, I know employees pay this too) but for employers, it isn't even capped!
Oh, add stamp-duty (for non-UK folks, thats taxing on buying property which given the cost of property in the UK, means each house move costs serval £K more) which adds loads to the gvrnmnt coffers!
And fuel tax. That one must generate a few extra quid for el-Tony + crew.
Not that I mean to rant or anything. I understand taxation is required, but I can't help but wonder exactly what they do with all this money... it truely is a massively, humongous amount of money!!
TV licensing can't... but the last I heard (on a usenet group... so it must be true!) was that when they first turn up, if you tell them to go away, then they have to do that. However, they can then get a warrent and *I believe*, on their next visit they arrive escorted presumably by police. Or maybe lawyers.
Whatever, I have personally had them arrive for a first visit and when I said they couldn't some in, the guy gave me a look like "I know you're guilty" and said something like "Right! Ok" like he was going to find out if I had a TV one way or another.
I think when the guy arrived, I had about 2 weeks left in the flat I was in, so I wasn't going to pay for a new licence then. And luckily they didn't turn up again before I left so I can't confirm what they do next.
Oh, other disinformation I have heard on usenet is that if on their first visit they find you *do* have a TV setup for reception, then they give you the chance to pay your licence. Nope. Friend of mine let them in, they saw the TV set working, and they hit them with the £1000 fine or court case thing. Hence, thats why I wouldn't let them past the door!
Aside from the fact that I thing its absolutely rediculous to be forced to pay simply for owning the equipment, I also hate the fact that no one (and I mean, no one) knows exactly what the rules are. Can you own a set, but just not have an aerial? Can it have a TV tunner that is de-tuned? No one knows, and because of the uncertainty, most people will pay.
Not that the BBC isn't worth the money, but I just object to not really having much choice in the matter!
In the 1980's some time there was a UK magazine that had a cover mounted flexi-disk thing with a ZX Spectrum game on it. If memory serves, it was a Thompson Twins (as in the 1980's band) adventure game (as in text).
/. article on playing vynl mp3's on an iPod... or perhaps a vPod... no? ok!
I also seem to recall I could never get it to load!
Honestly, you young'uns -- there's nothing new! I'm just waiting for the
According to a previous thread, companies can avoid being delisted as long as they have some kind of business plan to get things sorted.... but since SCO seem to be missing one of those it would seem that the end is very close.
It's Darl not Darryl. How come no one can get that right?
...yeah, like its really worth updating our address books! :D
As for your "dirty bomb" statement, yeah, give it a try. Start by walking into a nuclear power plant, past the six layers of security. Then enter the core, ignoring the fatal dose of radiation you'll be bathed in. Grab hold of a few dozen pebbles, ignoring the heat that burns the flesh off your hands and arms. Take them home. Grind them up, again, ignore the fact that the fumes of the uranium or plutonium are among the most powerful and fastest acting poisons known to man. Use fluorine (a controlled substance also instantly fatal if breathed) to create UF6 to separate the Uranium from the graphite gas...... blah blah blah...
Yeah, way to go cowboy - tell everyone how to do it!
(Note to moderators: the above comment is meant in jest. Okay? Good!)
Note however that Xerox isn't a universal name for a photo copier. In the UK we "photo copy" something. We understand using the name Xerox in place of photo-copy, but we don't use it.
We do often use the name Hoover (a brand name of a vacum cleaner in the UK. Not sure if they were available in the US) in place of vacum cleaner though... although that name might be fading these days.
You know, deep down, we are all Daniel Carrera on the inside! O_o
So would it be better if government agencies requested that office products support an existing open document standard, such as the one used by OOo? That would seem a safer route!
However - many developers I know believe that dev machines don't merit the same kind of hardening as production machines. "Hey! We're behind the firewall, we're safe!"
I'm not justifying what they're doing, but if they're behind a firewall then shouldn't they be safe from this worm? Surely the people getting infected are the people with MySQL ports open directly on the int0rweb *and* no hardening.
Maybe this'll serve as a wake-up call.
True!
Metronet are brilliant, and a very well kept secret!
There's the problem, though: how do you access MySQL without using their client library (short of some lame shell-script hack)?
I am sooo not a lawyer, but I'd guess that here, although you are using their code in that you're compiling it into your own software, you are not extending it... you're just building on top of their API?
But yeah, the distinction is not massively clear so I don't know if that leaves you open to problems on a legal front.
As others have said, the blog itself should be fine since its only the comments that should have the rel=nofollow on them. I also imagine that this is only really needed for *unmoderated* comment, where moderated content is not likely to contain spam. Can anyone confirm if Six Apart provides for this distinction?
Steady -- I'm still hoping slash code will support some kind of standard HTML before the decade is out!
It may, but it really helps for folks who use Windows and want to run a local copy of their database for development purposes.
Myself, I'm absolutely thrilled wiht this new release (and indeed, their new website -- the old one did look a bit naff). I expect PostGreSQL's popularity to increase a fair bit this year, and good luck to them!
LOL! I can't remember what it cost, but it certinly wasn't *that* cheap. But, I supose yous gets whats yous pays for!
:-)