But is this a regular roof (subject to a wide variety of weather patterns) or a special roof (subject to one type of weather)? If the latter, then what kind of weather is it? And do we have a choice of which roof, or is there only one?
Hmm, I suppose this could be a Troll, but I'll bite (a little) anyway...
I for one wait for Jesus Christ to come back. How do I know He will come back? Because He told us He would.
Yet your faith, Anonymous Coward, is not strong enough to associate an identity with? Why, are you more concerned with earthly acceptance than divine acceptance? Bah... If you have faith, prove it by not hiding.
Actually, I'm not asking for anything from the viewer, not even 50 cents. They gain $5 on their own, without paying me anything, by setting up a new account. (If they have an account already, well, they can tip me whatever they want or nothing at all.) Hmm... Perhaps I need to make that clearer on my site, if you viewed my site and didn't understand.
As for images being readily available on the Web, well, mine aren't. The idea is to share images I've created (my photography), not just stuff I've grabbed from other sites or whatever. Given that the idea is for viewing them online, I don't think most people would want to wait for, or try to display, a 1600x1200 image. That might be appropriate if they were printing them, but I don't expect that.
I've maintained a PayPal link associated with my science fiction short stories and (small collection of) photos, with an explanation that somebody can show appreciation if they like my works just by establishing a PayPal account. With $5 for me and $5 for them (and no out-of-pocket expense for them), it's an easy (and profitable) way to show appreciation, right? It's optional, of course -- the content can be seen/read for free.
Have I received even one tip? Nope. Maybe my writing and photography sucks. Maybe not enough people are even seeing my work. Or maybe tipping via PayPal doesn't work, at least not the way I'm trying. Oh well, it's a good thing I'm not publishing that way to make a living! I do it mostly in the hopes that others will enjoy my stuff... If I end up with a few bucks, I won't complain, but that's not the driving motivation.
I have come to disbelieve that anyone with any significant political power actually holds any measureable political beliefs. "Left vs Right" or "Conservative vs Liberal" doesn't exist anymore (if it ever did); at least now, it is only a facade to serve as entertainment for those unable or unwilling to think for themselves. The 'two sides' are one group comprised of individuals concerned, first and foremost by a vast margin, with their own personal success. Politics and representation of those who (often-ignorantly) put and keep them in power be damned; a comfortable life and a secure, fat paycheck are the only real goals.
We may be witnessing them being torn between their liberalism and their desire to make a buck.
I doubt that their claimed liberalism exists, and this issue is simply further evidence to support my belief.
Perhaps it is because I do have strong political beliefs that I tend toward being a Libertarian rather than supporting the Republicrats. But I do not belong to any political party at the moment, and I am not yet prepared to believe that a Libertarian in power would hold true to the party's political ideals any more than a Republicrat in power.
The real question is, when will those in the Open Source (and/or Free Software) movement(s) learn to take the new power in their hands, given freely by the masses pouring themselves onto the Internet, to wrest the court of public opinion in line with their position?
On the university campus where I used to work, the last office I had (after some rather uncomfortable locations, like next to the dish washing area of the main cafeteria) was in "the old steam plant." It was an old brick building, and our office space was spacious, open, and quiet. It was a relaxing place to work. (The fact that it looked out on a lawn where girls would sunbathe during the summer didn't hurt... {smirk}) The only real down side, location wise, was that a carpentry shop next door would sometimes fill the halls with potent chemical smells -- enough to give you a headache at times. But that was rare enough.
I'd give up my current desk in cube land in a heartbeat for a nicer office like that again.
This led me to wonder what will become of the terabytes of garbage that will be dumped into the Publius system by trolls, spammers, flamers, first posters, and the other mutant fuana of the net.
But isn't the Publius system based on a "pull" (request/response) architecture, much the same as the Web itself? If so, "spam" in Publius should be no worse than a Web page with "spam" -- it isn't affecting anybody who doesn't request it. (Indeed, the use of the term "spam" for a non-push publishing method seems counter to the meaning of the term itself.)
It's interesting to see people referring to games from the early 90s as "classic games." (Not referring to the article, which talked about 20 year old games.) Seeing Commander Keen discussed as a classic game makes me feel old in much the same way as knowing that people in college today were in diapers when I was "serving my nation" overseas... I'm not old, really... (Gotta keep telling myself that.)
This can backfire, though. I've had some luck doing it, but all too often (perhaps due to picking the wrong person who tries to make senseless suggestions in complete ignorance) I get so annoyed trying to explain the background that I have to walk away before I can even describe the problem. If you're gonna talk it through, definitely pick someone who will sit and listen without trying to suggest things (at least, not until you're really done with your own thought processes -- and if you're gonna stick around for any possible suggestions, pick someone in the first place who is clued-in enough to give decent ones).
Maybe it's just me/my situation, but the spouse is usually the wrong person for this sort of thing. Maybe because they try to be helpful even if there's no real chance of that. (Having a techie for a spouse might help, I suppose...)
It's very easy to blame Microsoft for letting a buffer overflow problem like this slip through. Just dump Outlook, right? Use [insert favorite non-MS product name here] instead and everything will be fine...
...not. While I am certainly not willing to excuse Microsoft in particular for this specific instance, it is unwise at best to assume that the same type of weakness does not, or will not in the future, exist in other, competing products. Given that software developers have shown, time and again, that they are unable or unwilling to catch and prevent this type of weakness from getting through, perhaps it's time to look for a stronger solution.
Specifically, perhaps it is time to fix the infrastructure -- in this case, Internet mail as a whole. Although it would be unfair to compare it to something as weak and outdated as QWK mail from the ol' BBS days, there are abundant weaknesses in the current model for Internet mail that allow nasty things like mail header security exploits. And spam. Imagine if spam was not just antisocial and/or illegal, but technically impossible?
How long can a date field be? For that matter, how long can any header field be? (No, I'm not asking for a technical answer based on the current system, I'm suggesting that you think about the meaning of the fields, and the maximum length necessary to impart that meaning.) Given that mail client software authors are demonstrably ignoring such length limitations, is it not time to enforce at the protocol level some basic validity and, ideally, permission from the recipient?
I don't have a blueprint to roll out for you. However, as long as we focus on the weaknesses of this or that client, server, company, etc., we are missing the boat.
One man's trash is another man's treasure... and vice versa. I wonder, compared to other anti-satellite weapons, where this would rank in terms of overall cost. Not to mention deployment speed and flexibility. Hmm...
It should all be nationalized, and guaranteed access for everyone.
Which, of course, implies mandatory payment (via taxation) by the same "everyone" -- including those who have absolutely no interest in "access." What a great idea -- not. I like getting what I pay for; I dislike paying for something I don't want or use. (For Internet access, of course, I speak for those who have no desire for it, rather than for myself.)
There may be some uncomfortable realities with a commercial Internet, but they're better (IMHO) than the more-subtle uncomfortable realities that arrive with forced payment for an optional service.
But this is really an issue of politics, rather than "backbone bullies," and there are other places to discuss non-technology political issues.
We could only wish it were so simple. Unfortunately, if the patent can be enforced, I would expect that they would simply license the technology {cough} and we would still see the same number of ads. They would just get a piece of the pie. They might even encourage more ads by giving various incentives to get companies in the door, to lock them in for more licensing fees in the future...:-(
Actually, no, I don't like the banner ads, and in fact I use Opera to browse Slashdot to make it easy to turn off ALL graphics and page formatting for Slashdot without affecting other browsing I do. Loads fast enough for me, that's for sure.
But my point was just that Slashdot (apparently) gets some significant amount of revenue from the ads, and I like Slashdot, thus I have to accept the idea that the ads (though I may never see them) may be providing something I like. Which is a lot better than most banner ads I run across, on sites that just plain suck.
Hmm, is that like the ad-driven Web site "bright side" to banner ads? With few exceptions (Slashdot being one, NoNags being another), I don't see it as a very bright side...
Have you been able to transfer a domain to them from NSI, or only create new ones? If you were able to transfer one, were you required to maintain a certain level of business with them? If I read their FAQ correctly, it looks like they require prepaid domains for transfers, but prepaid domains are only for 20 or more domains. Is that right or did I mis-read it?
I only have one domain (yeah, being the minimalist that I am), and I'm very interested in moving it from NSI to... well, anybody who doesn't shaft domain name owners. Given that expiration of the domain is only weeks away, now is the time to make the move. (This is a domain I've had with NSI since 1994. I think they've had quite enough of my money.)
After reading many of the posts here, I get the distinct feeling that many people are anticipating (not exact looking forward to it though) a Second American Revolution.
Wouldn't that be the Third? The US Civil War was the Second.
We Americans have never lost a war fought on our own soil (even against our own government)...
Um... I think you need to spend a little more time with the history books. "We Americans" (to be more specific, citizens of the United States) certainly fought -- and lost -- a very bloody civil war.
As for another one, it's certainly possible. When the USSR crumbled, I considered the possibility that the US would follow. At the time I felt it would be a result of global politics, but now, with our rights infringed on a more regular basis, I wonder if it will be internal politics instead that will light the fuse. The extensive restrictions on firearm ownership, "delightfully" in evidence with delays in gun sales, are only one of many violations of the US Constitution (as amended).
BTW, I'll be part of the Revolution, but only after I'm sure that it's real...
I doubt it. What is a real Revolution to you? One that succeeds? If so (i.e., if that is why the US Civil War in the 1800s was not a Revolution to you), it will be over before you decide it's real.
If you want to change property laws then change them, but do not pretend that downloading something that you are not supposed to download is completely different than for example walking into a bookstore and shoplifting. The result is the same, even if the method is not.
Not really -- your analogy is incorrect. Downloading something you're 'not supposed to' is on par with walking into a bookstore, carefully reading a book (so as to not damage it in any way), and returning it to the shelf in no worse condition than you found it. You can get arrested for shoplifting; you won't get arrested for reading a book in a bookstore. (You may get kicked out, but that's not anywhere near the same as being arrested.)
Production of a book incurs costs well beyond the original writing -- there are physical costs associated with everything from cutting down the tree to placing the finished book on the shelf. When you shoplift, you prevent those who incurred those costs from recovering them. None of this can be said for reading something online that should not have been posted there. That is part of why people believe (whether that belief is correct or not) that digital distribution fundamentally alters the whole notion of "ownership" of intellectual property.
Slashdot Mirror
Inquiring minds want to know.
Hmm, I suppose this could be a Troll, but I'll bite (a little) anyway...
I for one wait for Jesus Christ to come back. How do I know He will come back? Because He told us He would.
Yet your faith, Anonymous Coward, is not strong enough to associate an identity with? Why, are you more concerned with earthly acceptance than divine acceptance? Bah... If you have faith, prove it by not hiding.
''
Perhaps the question should be: Is the MP3 player an accessory for the Visor, or is the Visor an accessory for the MP3 player?
``
Actually, I'm not asking for anything from the viewer, not even 50 cents. They gain $5 on their own, without paying me anything, by setting up a new account. (If they have an account already, well, they can tip me whatever they want or nothing at all.) Hmm... Perhaps I need to make that clearer on my site, if you viewed my site and didn't understand.
As for images being readily available on the Web, well, mine aren't. The idea is to share images I've created (my photography), not just stuff I've grabbed from other sites or whatever. Given that the idea is for viewing them online, I don't think most people would want to wait for, or try to display, a 1600x1200 image. That might be appropriate if they were printing them, but I don't expect that.
I've maintained a PayPal link associated with my science fiction short stories and (small collection of) photos, with an explanation that somebody can show appreciation if they like my works just by establishing a PayPal account. With $5 for me and $5 for them (and no out-of-pocket expense for them), it's an easy (and profitable) way to show appreciation, right? It's optional, of course -- the content can be seen/read for free.
Have I received even one tip? Nope. Maybe my writing and photography sucks. Maybe not enough people are even seeing my work. Or maybe tipping via PayPal doesn't work, at least not the way I'm trying. Oh well, it's a good thing I'm not publishing that way to make a living! I do it mostly in the hopes that others will enjoy my stuff... If I end up with a few bucks, I won't complain, but that's not the driving motivation.
The left doesn't know what's right anymore.
I have come to disbelieve that anyone with any significant political power actually holds any measureable political beliefs. "Left vs Right" or "Conservative vs Liberal" doesn't exist anymore (if it ever did); at least now, it is only a facade to serve as entertainment for those unable or unwilling to think for themselves. The 'two sides' are one group comprised of individuals concerned, first and foremost by a vast margin, with their own personal success. Politics and representation of those who (often-ignorantly) put and keep them in power be damned; a comfortable life and a secure, fat paycheck are the only real goals.
We may be witnessing them being torn between their liberalism and their desire to make a buck.
I doubt that their claimed liberalism exists, and this issue is simply further evidence to support my belief.
Perhaps it is because I do have strong political beliefs that I tend toward being a Libertarian rather than supporting the Republicrats. But I do not belong to any political party at the moment, and I am not yet prepared to believe that a Libertarian in power would hold true to the party's political ideals any more than a Republicrat in power.
The real question is, when will those in the Open Source (and/or Free Software) movement(s) learn to take the new power in their hands, given freely by the masses pouring themselves onto the Internet, to wrest the court of public opinion in line with their position?
Ah well... ''
Google is OK. I tend to use MetaCrawler most, then Alta Vista.
More than just pretty girls...
I'd give up my current desk in cube land in a heartbeat for a nicer office like that again.
Girls?
``
But isn't the Publius system based on a "pull" (request/response) architecture, much the same as the Web itself? If so, "spam" in Publius should be no worse than a Web page with "spam" -- it isn't affecting anybody who doesn't request it. (Indeed, the use of the term "spam" for a non-push publishing method seems counter to the meaning of the term itself.)
Politics...
Did somebody say Zaxxon? Mmm...
Whaddayatalk...
Maybe it's just me/my situation, but the spouse is usually the wrong person for this sort of thing. Maybe because they try to be helpful even if there's no real chance of that. (Having a techie for a spouse might help, I suppose...)
Picture this...
And you can't count? Both were 575.
Whatever...
Specifically, perhaps it is time to fix the infrastructure -- in this case, Internet mail as a whole. Although it would be unfair to compare it to something as weak and outdated as QWK mail from the ol' BBS days, there are abundant weaknesses in the current model for Internet mail that allow nasty things like mail header security exploits. And spam. Imagine if spam was not just antisocial and/or illegal, but technically impossible?
How long can a date field be? For that matter, how long can any header field be? (No, I'm not asking for a technical answer based on the current system, I'm suggesting that you think about the meaning of the fields, and the maximum length necessary to impart that meaning.) Given that mail client software authors are demonstrably ignoring such length limitations, is it not time to enforce at the protocol level some basic validity and, ideally, permission from the recipient?
I don't have a blueprint to roll out for you. However, as long as we focus on the weaknesses of this or that client, server, company, etc., we are missing the boat.
Journey to Yandol
x 5:D28C66[ x E9:?< #~%cf :D >F49 36EE6C 3642FD6 :E =@@<D >@C6 D4C2>3=65] %96 >@C6 D4C2>3=65 :E =@@<D[ E96 =6DD =:<6=J :E :D E92E D@>6@?6 H:== ECJ E@ 564CJAE :E[ V42FD6 E96JV== <?@H E96JV== 92G6 2 C@F89 E:>6 @7 :E]]]
{sigh...}
Oh yeah? Well...
x 5:D28C66[ x E9:?F49 36EE6C 3642FD6 :E =@@@C6 D4C2>3=65] %96 >@C6 D4C2>3=65 :E =@@6@?6 H:== ECJ E@ 564CJAE :E[ V42FD6 E96JV== 6 @7 :E]]]
(For those too lazy or unequipped, go here.)
Which, of course, implies mandatory payment (via taxation) by the same "everyone" -- including those who have absolutely no interest in "access." What a great idea -- not. I like getting what I pay for; I dislike paying for something I don't want or use. (For Internet access, of course, I speak for those who have no desire for it, rather than for myself.)
There may be some uncomfortable realities with a commercial Internet, but they're better (IMHO) than the more-subtle uncomfortable realities that arrive with forced payment for an optional service.
But this is really an issue of politics, rather than "backbone bullies," and there are other places to discuss non-technology political issues.
We could only wish it were so simple. Unfortunately, if the patent can be enforced, I would expect that they would simply license the technology {cough} and we would still see the same number of ads. They would just get a piece of the pie. They might even encourage more ads by giving various incentives to get companies in the door, to lock them in for more licensing fees in the future... :-(
I weigh a lot less on Mars...
But my point was just that Slashdot (apparently) gets some significant amount of revenue from the ads, and I like Slashdot, thus I have to accept the idea that the ads (though I may never see them) may be providing something I like. Which is a lot better than most banner ads I run across, on sites that just plain suck.
What do you weigh on Mars?
There, see, you're answering your own question -- that is the price tag. :-)
--
...other silliness
I only have one domain (yeah, being the minimalist that I am), and I'm very interested in moving it from NSI to... well, anybody who doesn't shaft domain name owners. Given that expiration of the domain is only weeks away, now is the time to make the move. (This is a domain I've had with NSI since 1994. I think they've had quite enough of my money.)
For offline reading...
Wouldn't that be the Third? The US Civil War was the Second.
We Americans have never lost a war fought on our own soil (even against our own government)...
Um... I think you need to spend a little more time with the history books. "We Americans" (to be more specific, citizens of the United States) certainly fought -- and lost -- a very bloody civil war.
As for another one, it's certainly possible. When the USSR crumbled, I considered the possibility that the US would follow. At the time I felt it would be a result of global politics, but now, with our rights infringed on a more regular basis, I wonder if it will be internal politics instead that will light the fuse. The extensive restrictions on firearm ownership, "delightfully" in evidence with delays in gun sales, are only one of many violations of the US Constitution (as amended).
BTW, I'll be part of the Revolution, but only after I'm sure that it's real...
I doubt it. What is a real Revolution to you? One that succeeds? If so (i.e., if that is why the US Civil War in the 1800s was not a Revolution to you), it will be over before you decide it's real.
Not really -- your analogy is incorrect. Downloading something you're 'not supposed to' is on par with walking into a bookstore, carefully reading a book (so as to not damage it in any way), and returning it to the shelf in no worse condition than you found it. You can get arrested for shoplifting; you won't get arrested for reading a book in a bookstore. (You may get kicked out, but that's not anywhere near the same as being arrested.)
Production of a book incurs costs well beyond the original writing -- there are physical costs associated with everything from cutting down the tree to placing the finished book on the shelf. When you shoplift, you prevent those who incurred those costs from recovering them. None of this can be said for reading something online that should not have been posted there. That is part of why people believe (whether that belief is correct or not) that digital distribution fundamentally alters the whole notion of "ownership" of intellectual property.
Journy to Yandol