Is there a good spam filter I can install on my personal computer? I guess it has to involve setting up a mail server on my machine just for my incoming mail, but I'd be ready to look into doing that if it would help.
My ISP is using SpamAssasin, but I have no influence over the setting they use, and it lets far too much through.
I assume a server solution is better than a filtering client. Besides, it would make it possible to filter for both computers in the household.
That's simply not true if you expect benchmarks to reflect real world applications. Sure, it might be true for trivial utilities but for applications that stay alive for long periods of time chugging along, which is probably the majority of the worlds useful applications, it makes the results invalid. Or, at a minimum, sets greatly unrealistic expectations.
Most real world applications I can think of do not have a constant high CPU load. They typically have short peaks of loads and plenty of quiet moments. In such a load pattern, garbage collection can be performed when the load is low, and the GC hardly impacts performance at all.
Sorry, there was a slight typographical error in the first version you seem to have read. The correct spelling of the patriotic motto should be: "Land of the fee, Home of the slave".
In essence, no, al Qaeda forces are not required to be treated as prisoners of war, because...
That's probably true of any Al Queda prisoners. But I've seen no evidence that all or even most of the Guantanamo prisoners are Al Queda operatives.
Most likely the majority of them are Taliban. That is, the armed forces of the government of Afghanistan at the time, and as such most certainly worthy of POW status by any reading of the Geneva convention.
The only super power, major or otherwise, in the current world is the US. If it decides to attack Eurpoe, it is unlikely that the US will come to it's defense, due to the strong political and cultural ties between the US and said superpower.
Whatever you call it, the fact remains that paid maternity leave does cost money for the employer, and this makes it more expensive to hire a woman than a man, all other things being equal.
This, if enacted by law at least, makes women dependent on the good will and charitable nature of employers to get similar working conditions as men.
With the planet's population increasing at it's fastest rate in history, it doesn't seem likely that one individual company's hiring policy will affect the survival of the species enough to make any specific hiring policy self defeating.
The alternative to FCC regulation is not anarchy, but private ownership of frequences in an area. It would work just like for land and many other limited resources. Government institutions would still be involved, but only to register who owned what and settle disputes.
You could still call this "regulation' if you want to, but it's very different from the current micromanagement.
What I find most sad about this is that most people are so used to the government running their lifes that they couldn't even imagine such a system, much less weight the pros and cons.
Sure, but you don't need to take down a space ship to stop their launch. It's quite enough to attack the people who sent it up, assuming they're still planetside.
That has a lot of problems if the launcher is the mightiest military machine of all history, as in NASA's case, but much less if it's a bunch of private individuals.
As for the altitude, I think there is an internationally agreed altitude where it is OK to travel.
The thing that always made Schrödingers cat seird to me is that the cat is not counted as an observer of itself. I may not have seen if the cat is dead or not, but the cat sure has. So hasn't it collapsed the wave function? Would it be different if it was a human in the box?
Note how obedient the Iraqis are. Think about this. One man doesn't give another a blow job for the amusement of Twiggy unless he is terrified of the consequences if he refuses. Is it only psychological torture? In the pictures, yes. Somebody is behind them with whips and pliers. Those men are scared shitless, and they have a reason.
I can't help wondering: If this was the stuff they didn't feel they could get into trouble for documenting, what may have happened when they tried to hide their tracks?
The best solution I've ever seen of this problem was the Rio restaurant that had a metered beer tap on every table. Not entirely unlike a gas pump.At the end of the meal you got a bill with the total amount of beer consumed at the table.
Or so I assume. I can't really remember that part of the night very clearly.
This does nothing to defeat the stereotype of America as a very violent brutal place. In my country, being non violent is true of 99% of the people, and nothing you would point out as unusual about any group.
You can compare the national sports. American football vs what the rest of the world calls football. Quite a difference in mentality. And I find it hard to imagine that so many kids who play American football get a solid education and training in beating each other up. That would bever fly where I came from...
These guys claim to be the best car buying service in the land, and my experience bears it out. You pay them $190, and they get the best offers from all dealers in your area. Since you paid that much, the dealers know you're serious, and give you a very competitive final offer.
Aside from the price, the convenience is hard to beat. You just tell them what you want, and a week later they email you the offers, and then you can go to the cheapest one and pick it up without any of the usual drama and haggling.
I know I got a $500 better deal than some who invested a lot of time and skill in negotiating.
You know nothing about what kind of person I am. And it's not really important anyway. Let's stick to the issues.
It has nothing to do with who is considered human or not.
If you woke up in the morning and read in the paper that your father/brother/mom/sister had been shot and then read that some guy you've never heard of from a town on the far side of the country was killed.
My relative, of course.
But how does this explain what Americans mean when they say "700 people have died in Iraq"?
If you mean that Americans naturally are more interested to hear about American deaths, that is eexactly what I was saying, and not much of a counterargument to it.
Tell me, if the US had stepped in to do something about Hitler would you be claiming the Nazis were just innocents?
No. Whatever that proves...
I support the war simply becuase it's deposed a monster.
I hope you're right, but I'll reserve judgement until 5-10 years pass and we see if there isn't a new monster running the place. Right now things are certainly constantly getting worse.
...and the other one
If they were warning shots, why didn't the ambulance driver turn back? If you're getting warnign shots fired at you and you continue to do whatever caused the warning shots in the first place you have no right to complain.
The whole aritcle is a bunch reports of people being shot at while in the US controlled areas. So therefore it MUST be US. I mean it's not like the Iraqis would ever harm an innocent right?
So you would agree then that this is a different media picture than the one given by the US media? This is not some far left crazy media outlet, but stodgy old conservative BBC. I assure you the average media outlet anywhere else in the world depicts the US in even worse light. Worldwide conspiracy, or with a grain of truth?
You're right that the article doesn't prove that the allegations against the US troops are true. But it does report both sides of the situation, including Iraqi eye witnesses on the ground, while the US media mostly just reprints Pentagon press releases.
Seriously. Don't take my word for it, read some foreign media on the web for a while. There is plenty of British, Canadian, Australian, Indian, and many other english language news sources you can read.
Is the driver dead? Then it wasn't a sniper and certainly not a US sniper shootig at it. Doing so would violate international law and the uniform code. US soldiers have the felxilbity to disobey orders that are clearly illegal.
Are you implying the US never violates international law or commits war crimes? There is plenty of easily accessible documentation of the opposite.
That's a great answer to something I didn't write.
You offer no evidence that Americans are in fact concerned by the suffering of the Iraqi people, or are even aware of it.
When I follow these discussions among Americans in the media and around me, the killing of tens of thousands of people is almost never brought up, even as something worth considering if it was good or bad. The 700 dead US soldiers are at least a 100 times bigger concern. Many times phrases like "700 people have been killed so far!" are used, which makes it very clear the speaker either don't consider Iraqis people, or aren't aware of their deaths.
If the invasion was a good or bad idea is a different issue, which I didn't even address in my post, which was a response to someone saying that avoiding US soldiers getting killed was the main reason anyone opposed the war.
Despite what you seem to think, almost literally everyone, including war opponents, is happy that Saddam is gone. The fact that he was put there by the US in the first place makes your talk of irony and self contradictory nature quite ironic.
Unfortunately, American media is based on ratings, which also means "more blood=more ratings".
So why haven't I seen a single dead arab in US media? They're not hard to find. The rest of the world sees them.
Americans don't get a lot of the facts about what's happening like other countries do. This explains a lot of the differce of perception.
And please do not say that the 700 soldiers that have died are a "lesser concern".
You prove my point. To you 20.000 dead Iraqis are a lesser concern than 700 dead Americans. Even disregarding that the Americans are the aggressors and the Iraqis the victims, it shows that you don't consider them fully human.
Don't be surprised when foreigners dislike you with that attitude.
I can say with a straight face that most Americans truely want to make the world a better place.
Of course they do. As do the vast majority of people everywhere.
Those soldiers believed in something greater than themselves...
Do you actually know any US soldiers?? I do. They're not any better or worse than other people, in my experience. Rather than the lofty motives you proclaim, they typically didn't have many other options, and jumped on this to get a job and/or education.
if we fought a united (!) Europe, we could probably be beaten.
Not a chance. The US reportedly does over half of the military spending in the world, and could easily defeat the entire military force of the rest of the planet.
That's disregarding nuclear missiles, where the US is also vastly dominant but still vulnerable.
For one thing, no other country has any naval power at all that can stand up, so the US owns the oceans. With aircraft carriers that means they also own the airspace of any region they wish to pick off first. I don't think I need go on.
By far most of the people who oppose the war are not American, and their primary reason to oppose it is the tens of thousands of Iraqis that were and are killed. Not that most people want the American soldiers dead, but those 700 are a much lesser concern, especially since they did do most of all that killing.
The tendency of Americans to completely forget/not care that there even were any Iraqis hurt is maybe the most disturbing thing about this country to me.
it brings down the barrier, but doesn't raise people's skills.
I'd agree that it doesn't raise people's talent, but it does make it possible for everyone, talented or not, to practice the craft. And that will improve their skills.
The main gain is probably all those really talented people who never would have gotten close to making any movies that now get the chance to develop.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd love to hear what a 101st helicopter pilot had to say about that doctrine.
Is there a good spam filter I can install on my personal computer? I guess it has to involve setting up a mail server on my machine just for my incoming mail, but I'd be ready to look into doing that if it would help.
My ISP is using SpamAssasin, but I have no influence over the setting they use, and it lets far too much through.
I assume a server solution is better than a filtering client. Besides, it would make it possible to filter for both computers in the household.
I'm on Mac OS X.
The $999 HD-Tivo is already out, and it's very useful.
The revolution may have to wait a while.
That's simply not true if you expect benchmarks to reflect real world applications. Sure, it might be true for trivial utilities but for applications that stay alive for long periods of time chugging along, which is probably the majority of the worlds useful applications, it makes the results invalid. Or, at a minimum, sets greatly unrealistic expectations.
Most real world applications I can think of do not have a constant high CPU load. They typically have short peaks of loads and plenty of quiet moments. In such a load pattern, garbage collection can be performed when the load is low, and the GC hardly impacts performance at all.
Sorry, there was a slight typographical error in the first version you seem to have read. The correct spelling of the patriotic motto should be: "Land of the fee, Home of the slave".
We apologize for any inconvenience!
In essence, no, al Qaeda forces are not required to be treated as prisoners of war, because...
That's probably true of any Al Queda prisoners. But I've seen no evidence that all or even most of the Guantanamo prisoners are Al Queda operatives.
Most likely the majority of them are Taliban. That is, the armed forces of the government of Afghanistan at the time, and as such most certainly worthy of POW status by any reading of the Geneva convention.
The only super power, major or otherwise, in the current world is the US. If it decides to attack Eurpoe, it is unlikely that the US will come to it's defense, due to the strong political and cultural ties between the US and said superpower.
Whatever you call it, the fact remains that paid maternity leave does cost money for the employer, and this makes it more expensive to hire a woman than a man, all other things being equal.
This, if enacted by law at least, makes women dependent on the good will and charitable nature of employers to get similar working conditions as men.
With the planet's population increasing at it's fastest rate in history, it doesn't seem likely that one individual company's hiring policy will affect the survival of the species enough to make any specific hiring policy self defeating.
The alternative to FCC regulation is not anarchy, but private ownership of frequences in an area. It would work just like for land and many other limited resources. Government institutions would still be involved, but only to register who owned what and settle disputes.
You could still call this "regulation' if you want to, but it's very different from the current micromanagement.
What I find most sad about this is that most people are so used to the government running their lifes that they couldn't even imagine such a system, much less weight the pros and cons.
Sure, but you don't need to take down a space ship to stop their launch. It's quite enough to attack the people who sent it up, assuming they're still planetside.
That has a lot of problems if the launcher is the mightiest military machine of all history, as in NASA's case, but much less if it's a bunch of private individuals.
As for the altitude, I think there is an internationally agreed altitude where it is OK to travel.
The thing that always made Schrödingers cat seird to me is that the cat is not counted as an observer of itself. I may not have seen if the cat is dead or not, but the cat sure has. So hasn't it collapsed the wave function? Would it be different if it was a human in the box?
Someone named Fred said it much better than I could:
Note how obedient the Iraqis are. Think about this. One man doesn't give another a blow job for the amusement of Twiggy unless he is terrified of the consequences if he refuses. Is it only psychological torture? In the pictures, yes. Somebody is behind them with whips and pliers. Those men are scared shitless, and they have a reason.
That's an excerpt from here.
...the less they usually know!
I don't know where you get your certain and indignant knowledge of all things, but I seriously recommend trying other information sources!
Here's a link to a 5 minute NPR report dealing with this in detail: (Click the "Morning Edition audio" link right under the headline)
The extent of your misinformedness is well summarized by this quote:
"There's a policy that Americans can not be tried in Iraqi courts".
I can't help wondering: If this was the stuff they didn't feel they could get into trouble for documenting, what may have happened when they tried to hide their tracks?
The best solution I've ever seen of this problem was the Rio restaurant that had a metered beer tap on every table. Not entirely unlike a gas pump.At the end of the meal you got a bill with the total amount of beer consumed at the table.
Or so I assume. I can't really remember that part of the night very clearly.
I'm aware that a lot of explosives carry their own oxygen. That doesn't mean they don't require oxygen to explode.
I guess I was thinking you would ideally use a bomb that can use atmospheric oxygen, but maybe they don't really exist.
You can probably make a bigger crater by crashing the craft it came in anyway.
American geeks tend to be smaller and non-violent
This does nothing to defeat the stereotype of America as a very violent brutal place. In my country, being non violent is true of 99% of the people, and nothing you would point out as unusual about any group.
You can compare the national sports. American football vs what the rest of the world calls football. Quite a difference in mentality. And I find it hard to imagine that so many kids who play American football get a solid education and training in beating each other up. That would bever fly where I came from...
1. Bombs are heavy
2. Non nuclear bombs require oxygen to explode
These guys claim to be the best car buying service in the land, and my experience bears it out. You pay them $190, and they get the best offers from all dealers in your area. Since you paid that much, the dealers know you're serious, and give you a very competitive final offer.
Aside from the price, the convenience is hard to beat. You just tell them what you want, and a week later they email you the offers, and then you can go to the cheapest one and pick it up without any of the usual drama and haggling.
I know I got a $500 better deal than some who invested a lot of time and skill in negotiating.
http://www.checkbook.org/auto/carbarg.cfm
You know nothing about what kind of person I am. And it's not really important anyway. Let's stick to the issues.
It has nothing to do with who is considered human or not.
If you woke up in the morning and read in the paper that your father/brother/mom/sister had been shot and then read that some guy you've never heard of from a town on the far side of the country was killed.
My relative, of course.
But how does this explain what Americans mean when they say "700 people have died in Iraq"?
If you mean that Americans naturally are more interested to hear about American deaths, that is eexactly what I was saying, and not much of a counterargument to it.
Tell me, if the US had stepped in to do something about Hitler would you be claiming the Nazis were just innocents?
No. Whatever that proves...
I support the war simply becuase it's deposed a monster.
I hope you're right, but I'll reserve judgement until 5-10 years pass and we see if there isn't a new monster running the place. Right now things are certainly constantly getting worse.
...and the other one
If they were warning shots, why didn't the ambulance driver turn back? If you're getting warnign shots fired at you and you continue to do whatever caused the warning shots in the first place you have no right to complain.
The whole aritcle is a bunch reports of people being shot at while in the US controlled areas. So therefore it MUST be US. I mean it's not like the Iraqis would ever harm an innocent right?
So you would agree then that this is a different media picture than the one given by the US media? This is not some far left crazy media outlet, but stodgy old conservative BBC. I assure you the average media outlet anywhere else in the world depicts the US in even worse light. Worldwide conspiracy, or with a grain of truth?
You're right that the article doesn't prove that the allegations against the US troops are true. But it does report both sides of the situation, including Iraqi eye witnesses on the ground, while the US media mostly just reprints Pentagon press releases.
Seriously. Don't take my word for it, read some foreign media on the web for a while. There is plenty of British, Canadian, Australian, Indian, and many other english language news sources you can read.
Is the driver dead? Then it wasn't a sniper and certainly not a US sniper shootig at it. Doing so would violate international law and the uniform code. US soldiers have the felxilbity to disobey orders that are clearly illegal.
Are you implying the US never violates international law or commits war crimes? There is plenty of easily accessible documentation of the opposite.
That's a great answer to something I didn't write.
You offer no evidence that Americans are in fact concerned by the suffering of the Iraqi people, or are even aware of it.
When I follow these discussions among Americans in the media and around me, the killing of tens of thousands of people is almost never brought up, even as something worth considering if it was good or bad. The 700 dead US soldiers are at least a 100 times bigger concern. Many times phrases like "700 people have been killed so far!" are used, which makes it very clear the speaker either don't consider Iraqis people, or aren't aware of their deaths.
If the invasion was a good or bad idea is a different issue, which I didn't even address in my post, which was a response to someone saying that avoiding US soldiers getting killed was the main reason anyone opposed the war.
Despite what you seem to think, almost literally everyone, including war opponents, is happy that Saddam is gone. The fact that he was put there by the US in the first place makes your talk of irony and self contradictory nature quite ironic.
Unfortunately, American media is based on ratings, which also means "more blood=more ratings".
So why haven't I seen a single dead arab in US media? They're not hard to find. The rest of the world sees them.
Americans don't get a lot of the facts about what's happening like other countries do. This explains a lot of the differce of perception.
And please do not say that the 700 soldiers that have died are a "lesser concern".
You prove my point. To you 20.000 dead Iraqis are a lesser concern than 700 dead Americans. Even disregarding that the Americans are the aggressors and the Iraqis the victims, it shows that you don't consider them fully human.
Don't be surprised when foreigners dislike you with that attitude.
I can say with a straight face that most Americans truely want to make the world a better place.
Of course they do. As do the vast majority of people everywhere.
Those soldiers believed in something greater than themselves...
Do you actually know any US soldiers?? I do. They're not any better or worse than other people, in my experience. Rather than the lofty motives you proclaim, they typically didn't have many other options, and jumped on this to get a job and/or education.
if we fought a united (!) Europe, we could probably be beaten.
Not a chance. The US reportedly does over half of the military spending in the world, and could easily defeat the entire military force of the rest of the planet.
That's disregarding nuclear missiles, where the US is also vastly dominant but still vulnerable.
For one thing, no other country has any naval power at all that can stand up, so the US owns the oceans. With aircraft carriers that means they also own the airspace of any region they wish to pick off first. I don't think I need go on.
By far most of the people who oppose the war are not American, and their primary reason to oppose it is the tens of thousands of Iraqis that were and are killed. Not that most people want the American soldiers dead, but those 700 are a much lesser concern, especially since they did do most of all that killing.
The tendency of Americans to completely forget/not care that there even were any Iraqis hurt is maybe the most disturbing thing about this country to me.
it brings down the barrier, but doesn't raise people's skills.
I'd agree that it doesn't raise people's talent, but it does make it possible for everyone, talented or not, to practice the craft. And that will improve their skills.
The main gain is probably all those really talented people who never would have gotten close to making any movies that now get the chance to develop.