I agree. Why is China treated differently than Cuba? Money. While it is true that no single company or even nation can really choose not to do business with China because the loss to opportunistic competitors is just too terrible, why a critical mass could not be achievd by the US, the EU, and some assorted other organizations throwing up sanctions is simply a sign of a shameful lack of backbone. There is rationalization aplenty here, and I'm not buying it.
Sanctions against China on a massive scale would work quickly -- they have seen the trajectory they are on, and are wedded to it in mind and spirit. They need only look at FIdel Castro and it will be as though the Ghost of Christmas past had paid them a visit in the night. If only we had the guts to put this to them.
Because its reply-to address matches one of the email addresses to which you've addressed previously outbound mail.
The best anti-spam so far has been whitelisting based systems such as Mailblocks (before AOL bought them and their reliability started spiralling downhill). They had many little touches that grossly reduced any administrative burdens of maintaining a whitelist, but you could also see within this clever assortment of strategies the seeds of its undoing. That is, had everyone KNOWN how good this technique was, its theoretical vulnerabilities would have become actual.
I got around 1 spam a week (MAX) using that thing. I pity the delusional folks who think content analysis has a meaningful role to play. The real content is who sent something and to whom they addressed something, and how do they react when sent a challenge email. But again -- this only buys time. I think the real fix is a reinvention of the protocols such that senders of email can be charged money by recipients who deem it unwanted, with proceeds going to charitable organizations. That would be hard to jigger indeed, and we'd be able to retain anonymity when we desired it. I think you could make a system that combined accountability with privacy if you dug deep enough and dared to "just say no" to people who would not put money behind the credentials upon which their accountability was established.
IE is not a great browser on any platform, and if there is some good intended to come from improving its weakest, oldest living incarnation, perhaps that requires an explanation at the outset.
Rather than a purely faithful copy, why don't we focus on some incremental improvements and see what benefits emerge? For instance, they are wooly, and they are mammoth, and this makes them good. But maybe if they were WOOLIER or MORE MAMMOTH they'd be ever BETTER.
While I'm fully on board with criticism of PC manufacturers who drive up costs of support and development as they erode the simple quality of the user experience, I'd sooner gnaw my leg off than stoop to a console gaming platform.
The titles are vapid, the controls momentary. Whereas a game controller is like an etch-a-sketch, able to permit clumsy bumps from a centered position to going in 8 directions (technically, it may be otherwise, but with a 1/2 inch throw to them, the point is academic), a mouse seems a calligraphy pen that smoothly reads a continuous motion.
The issue is this: I know that they have determined that having a process running on my system is a good thing. For me, I have to wonder if this code is well written code that will not spin or leak memory, or is it going to cause problems like that chronically, for all the while my PC is booted up.
Unless I can think of a good benefit that necessitates having processes running, I try to avoid the possibility that undue consequences or malicious behavior is emanating from something visually embodied by that little tray icon. There is the additional aspect to consider that oftentimes the one whose interests are being served by that ever-running little stub are not mine but the entity that crafted it.
I guess I know some programs might be running and exposing me to the same problems without having a tray icon. But I complain about what I can see!
The clumsy, bloated feel to the leading AV "solutions" always seem pretty much like spyware to me.
Long processes running at startup. Little do-nothing-of-value icons in the task tray. Pop-up windows artlessly trying to sell me a subscription renewal, and referring me to a web page with so many links and visual clutter than I don't even know which product thereon is MINE.
I do all the computing I can these days on my Powerbook, and try to restrict the types of computing on the XP box to those which reduce my risk to the utmost. When I even think of viruses, I run one of the vastly more considerately crafted second-tier players such as Grisoft -- ones that run on a "when you invoke them" basis, and don't sit there trying to secure the many vulnerabilities of day-to-day WIndows use.
There are so many threats these days that the best defense, I feel, has to center on avoiding the most attacked platform or your computing time is largely spent actively offsetting risk. Don't want to get wet? Come in out of the rain.
Why can't we get people to focus on the real issues making television unrewarding? Excessive ads (or ANY ads on cable content), garish product placement within the programs, and in documentary shows, a terrible "sawtooth" exposition style adopted in reaction to channel-surfers wherein each commercial break is followed by a successively lengthier recap of everything introduced thus far.
The overall effect of these encroachments is that a given hour of television offers more repetition and a shallower view of the subject materal.
So he was distributing works in violation of copyright... punishment IS due him. That the headline at least does not suggest that the extremely valuable medium he misused is not being assaulted unfairly is, I feel, encouraging.
The 18 coins one was brilliant. This is less so, but fun.
Consider all pairs of prime numbers whose difference is 2 EXCEPT 3/5. For instance, 11/13 or 29/31 etc.
The numbers sandwiched between all such pairs is divisible by 6. Without resort to fancy proofs... why is this, and why is the 3 and 5 pair different from the others?
The registry is a monolithic hierarchy (when viewed as a file) of name/value pairs, (entirely?) lacking in permission-based control, requiring its own applications and APIs to set and query -- cruft that has no purpose other than to serve its opaque, obstinant
The filesystem is a flexible hierarchical collection of filename/filecontent pairs, richly safeguarded by ACL permissions, readable and writable by applications and APIs no computer can possibly dispense with (unless you are willing to chuck conventional filesystems as part of the process of examining the registry).
Taking the above, we can see that the registry duplicates (poorly) functionalty that already was resident in the computer OS. It creates such nastiness as making the installation of programs more tricky by requiring them to be a mix of file copies and registry settings. Along with this comes the artifact that applications cannot be simply moved about once installed (possibly this was part of what the registry was really intended to be: an anti-piracy construct). But it gets even worse -- Microsoft failed to regard application installationa and removal as something the OS should support and govern off-the-shelf. The result of this is that application developers opt for one of many buggy and bloated "installer apps", each of which conform loosely to almost non-existent rules for what is stored where (on disk or within the registry).
This is, indeed, a part of the problem and not remotely a laughing matter. Being a male engineer (part of the 80-90% majority in my field), you sacrifice a significant amount of exposure to female friends. The serendipitous opportunities to just meet someone in an informal setting is extremely isolating.
Isn't the root cause that dullards are allowed to call people? Why not have a phone that first demands a precis of the reason for the call, and which only permits it to be made when it is convinced there is some merit?
Huh? You can't alleviate population growth by sending people to other planets. The throughput capacity of any conceivable system for moving us off is so terribly finite that the process is not that of transplanting the sequoia -- it is one of snipping off and sending out twigs for establishing new growth in another nursery.
Barring magic teleporters, space travel permits 1 human in 20 million (tops) to move to a new planet. Those left behind receive only the satisfaction of knowing his species eggs is in more than the one basket he is forever stuck in.
When is someone going to take a porn video, XOR it with CMD.EXE from XP, and post the resulting mess on BitTorrent as the key file which "unlocks pornographic content slyly shipped with Windows". We could demand a rating sticker on the OS and have it pulled from mainstream distribution.
What does it matter what he said in 2003? He had no sources of information to base views on that were contrary the ones he voiced in such detail (and with such conviction) up until he lost his access to the best information anyone NOT working for Hussein could hope to draw upon.
I'll grant that Ritter was correct on WMD. But I suspect someone has blackmailed him into this implausible, groundless and never-explained reversal of his stance.
I had this up and running on a Danger Hip-top in 2002 with many of the projected features described:
1. phone app decoding single-button morse input 2. output in "skinnable" sound pulses... or LED flashes... or vibe... or read as text on the screen 3. all but latter output form retained original timings of the encoding keywork -- to preserve sender's "fist" 4. My media was character-buffered channel-based chat (like wireless telegraphy), but had the Danger offered "stack-like" access to SMS traffic, tying into SMS would have been a natural.
Morse entry is more FUN than traditional phone text entry -- providing a Tetris-like enjoyment. It does not require the user to "interact" with the phone as he must with T9 (where the user must watch what the phone is offering for completion). This makes it a pure input mode which would ultimately require less attention. It was comparable in speed to conventional entry (see anecdotal chart on the webpage).
As a neophyte, I never got good at "copying" morse, but then again, as the app decoded to text, I had a crutch which spared me the actual need toi develop this proficiency.
What people seem to forget is that encoding text on phones is not terribly easy to learn in and of itself, though I'd think it easier than Morse. However, if this practice is one you feel you're going to rely upon regularly, you might as well look to Morse as a better solution once proficiency is achieved. QWERTY is even better for most people, obviously, when form factors allow.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. Why is China treated differently than Cuba? Money. While it is true that no single company or even nation can really choose not to do business with China because the loss to opportunistic competitors is just too terrible, why a critical mass could not be achievd by the US, the EU, and some assorted other organizations throwing up sanctions is simply a sign of a shameful lack of backbone. There is rationalization aplenty here, and I'm not buying it.
Sanctions against China on a massive scale would work quickly -- they have seen the trajectory they are on, and are wedded to it in mind and spirit. They need only look at FIdel Castro and it will be as though the Ghost of Christmas past had paid them a visit in the night. If only we had the guts to put this to them.
tone
Because its reply-to address matches one of the email addresses to which you've addressed previously outbound mail.
The best anti-spam so far has been whitelisting based systems such as Mailblocks (before AOL bought them and their reliability started spiralling downhill). They had many little touches that grossly reduced any administrative burdens of maintaining a whitelist, but you could also see within this clever assortment of strategies the seeds of its undoing. That is, had everyone KNOWN how good this technique was, its theoretical vulnerabilities would have become actual.
I got around 1 spam a week (MAX) using that thing. I pity the delusional folks who think content analysis has a meaningful role to play. The real content is who sent something and to whom they addressed something, and how do they react when sent a challenge email. But again -- this only buys time. I think the real fix is a reinvention of the protocols such that senders of email can be charged money by recipients who deem it unwanted, with proceeds going to charitable organizations. That would be hard to jigger indeed, and we'd be able to retain anonymity when we desired it. I think you could make a system that combined accountability with privacy if you dug deep enough and dared to "just say no" to people who would not put money behind the credentials upon which their accountability was established.
tone
Isn't XML the CSV of Y2K?
tone
Well, until we license them our opposable thumb technology, they're stuck with their silly form of the game.
tone
Doesn't the language need LESS complexity? tone
Who comes up with this irrelevant clap-trap?
IE is not a great browser on any platform, and if there is some good intended to come from improving its weakest, oldest living incarnation, perhaps that requires an explanation at the outset.
tone
Rather than a purely faithful copy, why don't we focus on some incremental improvements and see what benefits emerge? For instance, they are wooly, and they are mammoth, and this makes them good. But maybe if they were WOOLIER or MORE MAMMOTH they'd be ever BETTER.
While I'm fully on board with criticism of PC manufacturers who drive up costs of support and development as they erode the simple quality of the user experience, I'd sooner gnaw my leg off than stoop to a console gaming platform.
The titles are vapid, the controls momentary. Whereas a game controller is like an etch-a-sketch, able to permit clumsy bumps from a centered position to going in 8 directions (technically, it may be otherwise, but with a 1/2 inch throw to them, the point is academic), a mouse seems a calligraphy pen that smoothly reads a continuous motion.
tone
The issue is this: I know that they have determined that having a process running on my system is a good thing. For me, I have to wonder if this code is well written code that will not spin or leak memory, or is it going to cause problems like that chronically, for all the while my PC is booted up.
Unless I can think of a good benefit that necessitates having processes running, I try to avoid the possibility that undue consequences or malicious behavior is emanating from something visually embodied by that little tray icon. There is the additional aspect to consider that oftentimes the one whose interests are being served by that ever-running little stub are not mine but the entity that crafted it.
I guess I know some programs might be running and exposing me to the same problems without having a tray icon. But I complain about what I can see!
tone
The clumsy, bloated feel to the leading AV "solutions" always seem pretty much like spyware to me.
Long processes running at startup.
Little do-nothing-of-value icons in the task tray.
Pop-up windows artlessly trying to sell me a subscription renewal, and referring me to a web page with so many links and visual clutter than I don't even know which product thereon is MINE.
I do all the computing I can these days on my Powerbook, and try to restrict the types of computing on the XP box to those which reduce my risk to the utmost. When I even think of viruses, I run one of the vastly more considerately crafted second-tier players such as Grisoft -- ones that run on a "when you invoke them" basis, and don't sit there trying to secure the many vulnerabilities of day-to-day WIndows use.
There are so many threats these days that the best defense, I feel, has to center on avoiding the most attacked platform or your computing time is largely spent actively offsetting risk. Don't want to get wet? Come in out of the rain.
tone
At least they don't say that you have to move out of the country if you delete the songs from your computer.
tone
Why can't we get people to focus on the real issues making television unrewarding? Excessive ads (or ANY ads on cable content), garish product placement within the programs, and in documentary shows, a terrible "sawtooth" exposition style adopted in reaction to channel-surfers wherein each commercial break is followed by a successively lengthier recap of everything introduced thus far.
The overall effect of these encroachments is that a given hour of television offers more repetition and a shallower view of the subject materal.
tone
Good to see people held accountable.
So he was distributing works in violation of copyright... punishment IS due him. That the headline at least does not suggest that the extremely valuable medium he misused is not being assaulted unfairly is, I feel, encouraging.
tone
Not usually very good at these things, but I got this in two rolls with 3 taken as confirmation. Woo hoo!
tone
The 18 coins one was brilliant. This is less so, but fun.
Consider all pairs of prime numbers whose difference is 2 EXCEPT 3/5. For instance, 11/13 or 29/31 etc.
The numbers sandwiched between all such pairs is divisible by 6. Without resort to fancy proofs... why is this, and why is the 3 and 5 pair different from the others?
tone
Consider this.
The registry is a monolithic hierarchy (when viewed as a file) of name/value pairs, (entirely?) lacking in permission-based control, requiring its own applications and APIs to set and query -- cruft that has no purpose other than to serve its opaque, obstinant
The filesystem is a flexible hierarchical collection of filename/filecontent pairs, richly safeguarded by ACL permissions, readable and writable by applications and APIs no computer can possibly dispense with (unless you are willing to chuck conventional filesystems as part of the process of examining the registry).
Taking the above, we can see that the registry duplicates (poorly) functionalty that already was resident in the computer OS. It creates such nastiness as making the installation of programs more tricky by requiring them to be a mix of file copies and registry settings. Along with this comes the artifact that applications cannot be simply moved about once installed (possibly this was part of what the registry was really intended to be: an anti-piracy construct). But it gets even worse -- Microsoft failed to regard application installationa and removal as something the OS should support and govern off-the-shelf. The result of this is that application developers opt for one of many buggy and bloated "installer apps", each of which conform loosely to almost non-existent rules for what is stored where (on disk or within the registry).
tone
Or Microsoft gets what it pays for -- a user.
tone
This is, indeed, a part of the problem and not remotely a laughing matter. Being a male engineer (part of the 80-90% majority in my field), you sacrifice a significant amount of exposure to female friends. The serendipitous opportunities to just meet someone in an informal setting is extremely isolating.
Are they seriously suggesting that we feed people with HIV to crocodiles in order to kill the virus?
tone
Isn't the root cause that dullards are allowed to call people? Why not have a phone that first demands a precis of the reason for the call, and which only permits it to be made when it is convinced there is some merit?
tone
Huh? You can't alleviate population growth by sending people to other planets. The throughput capacity of any conceivable system for moving us off is so terribly finite that the process is not that of transplanting the sequoia -- it is one of snipping off and sending out twigs for establishing new growth in another nursery.
Barring magic teleporters, space travel permits 1 human in 20 million (tops) to move to a new planet. Those left behind receive only the satisfaction of knowing his species eggs is in more than the one basket he is forever stuck in.
When is someone going to take a porn video, XOR it with CMD.EXE from XP, and post the resulting mess on BitTorrent as the key file which "unlocks pornographic content slyly shipped with Windows". We could demand a rating sticker on the OS and have it pulled from mainstream distribution.
tone
What does it matter what he said in 2003? He had no sources of information to base views on that were contrary the ones he voiced in such detail (and with such conviction) up until he lost his access to the best information anyone NOT working for Hussein could hope to draw upon.
I'll grant that Ritter was correct on WMD. But I suspect someone has blackmailed him into this implausible, groundless and never-explained reversal of his stance.
I had this up and running on a Danger Hip-top in 2002 with many of the projected features described:
1. phone app decoding single-button morse input
2. output in "skinnable" sound pulses... or LED flashes... or vibe... or read as text on the screen
3. all but latter output form retained original timings of the encoding keywork -- to preserve sender's "fist"
4. My media was character-buffered channel-based chat (like wireless telegraphy), but had the Danger offered "stack-like" access to SMS traffic, tying into SMS would have been a natural.
I have a write up on it at
http://dreadnoughtproject.org/WTF/cw/
In hindsight, the lessons I took were these:
Morse entry is more FUN than traditional phone text entry -- providing a Tetris-like enjoyment. It does not require the user to "interact" with the phone as he must with T9 (where the user must watch what the phone is offering for completion). This makes it a pure input mode which would ultimately require less attention. It was comparable in speed to conventional entry (see anecdotal chart on the webpage).
As a neophyte, I never got good at "copying" morse, but then again, as the app decoded to text, I had a crutch which spared me the actual need toi develop this proficiency.
What people seem to forget is that encoding text on phones is not terribly easy to learn in and of itself, though I'd think it easier than Morse. However, if this practice is one you feel you're going to rely upon regularly, you might as well look to Morse as a better solution once proficiency is achieved. QWERTY is even better for most people, obviously, when form factors allow.
tone