Correction. The second sentence should read: The first was while it was a minority religion in Medina, the second while it was a majority religion in Mecca.
One of the problems with the Koran is that is was written in 2 "sections". The first was while it was a minority religion in Mecca, the second while it was a majority religion. You have quoted from the first "section", it should be matched with a quote from the second:
"Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: 'I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!' That was because they defied Allah and His apostle. He that defies Allah and his apostle shall be sternly punished by Allah." (Sura 8.12-13)
2 of those worms (Slammer and Code Red) related to services that people might want to expose. Namely SQL Server and IIS. So putting them behind a firewall is not necessarily a solution, although patching is.
(Mootar) morons. (Mootar) these people who live in my apartment complex are connected to my wireless (Mootar) they must think they're super-cool hackers by breaking into my completely unsecure network (Mootar) unfortunatly, the connection works both ways (Mootar) long story short, they now have loads of horse porn on their computer
In Australia there are some more enlightened ISPs.
When I was setting up house recently I called iiNet to find their policy on running servers off your home connection. The guy had to ask his supervisor, but the supervisor confirmed it is permitted under their TOS.
Oh, and if you are at college writing your thesis, then I highly recommend using LaTeX instead like I did. In terms of typesetting and formatting Word doesn't even come close.
I'd echo that. It also just reduces grief. Everyone I know who has written their thesis in word has had problems. Mostly it screws up the index, or label on figures/tables/etc.
Evolution and Thunderbird have the potential to render Outlook obsolete
They may have the potential to do that, but Thunderbird at least is a hell of a long way from there. I can't seak for Evolution.
OK so IMAP (or IMAP over SSL if you prefer) can replace MAPI. That is *one* of the 3 major functions outlook has performed since Office 2000.
What thunderbird can't do is: 1. shared address book 2. shared calendering/scheduling tools
Expanding on 1, thunderbird can read LDAP address books. I personally had major troubles getting this to work and gave up after a day or so, but from what I have read others have got it working. But it can't write to them. This has been a registered bug for something like a couple of years. Most of that time they seem to have spent working out which LDAP format to use.
And as for 2, until they can sort something neat out to get sunbird to sync with a server and schedule meetings, then it is nothing like what Outlook offers.
You'll also notice that 2 also needs something to run server side, so they'd need support from someone to write some server side code to manage this.
The problem is that people build small databases in Access. They work fine so they grow and more functionality is added. Then you hit the wall. Once you hit that wall there is nowhere to go. You can't just upsize to MSSQL.
The person recieving the call has no information as to who is calling them. To find that out, they need to pick up the phone*. On the other hand the person making the call knows who they are calling. Also they initiate the phone call. Therefore they have more control, therefore they should be charged.
* Sure you can use caller ID, but a lot of people I know have hidden numbers and a lot of (wired) phones don't display the number that is calling. I know that in the US you can dial a number first to get your number displayed, but the onus is still on the person making the call. Add to that the fact that companies can have a group of numbers to dial out on. Also more than one person can use the same number to dial out on (eg I might want to talk to my sister but not my parents). The upshot is, you still don't know who is calling you until you pick up the phone.
Wouldn't it made more sense to sue the fleeing criminal?
You don't understand the first rule of suing someone. You sue the person with the deepest pockets. Who do you think is more likely to be able to pay up, the police department or a criminal?
Re:Perl is not too loose and messy
on
Beyond Java
·
· Score: 1
I'll post some.
1. You can add properties to class instances. That is plain evil.
2. ability to set your own delimiters on comments
3. IMO inconsistent syntax. eg a print is: print [filehandle] , but push is: push(, value). Either use commas or don't, but don't mess about half way there.
4. A massive (and far too complex syntax), with a reliance on cryptic symbols or operators. eg elif, eq (== not good enough for you?), the for opening files, $_.
I actually like the regex stuff (but I am far from an expert in that area). I just don't see why the entire language has to look like that. And yes you can write elegant, clean code in perl is is just quite hard.
Don't give me that TMTOTDI crap. Some of the features should not exist.
In my Autralia the state I live in (NSW) has flourine in the water. The state to the North (Queensland) doesn't. Dentists can say they can always tell someone who has move from Queensland to NSW.
Reading Curahee recently, he describes how during training at least one person fell without their parachute opening and survived, but I think this was a relatively low training jump.
Also surely once you reach terminal velocity, surely this becomes moot. I don't know how how you have to go before you reach terminal velocity, but surely after you reach that height, you have an equal chance no matter how much farther up you go. There might be some other unpleasant effects as you go higher (like frostbite). Maybe I am missing something here.
He knew a couple who moved to America for a few years (this is from Australia). She was very svelte.
Without changing their diet or activity, she put on a large amount of weight. They worked out what is was because there was so much sugar in *everything*. After moving back to Australia she returned to her normal weight.
We (our family business) charge on average about $2000 with all the costs considered of operating them (electricity, cryogenic liquids, trained personnel, depreciation)
I read that as decapitation. I was surprised to find that was part of the procedure and was in the process of deciding that I didn't want an MRI scan in the near future.
The two projects have different aims. If I understand it correctly Madwifi aims to have native linux drivers. ndiswrapper works by acting as a wrapper around the windows drivers. So ndiswrapper is less "pure" to the zealots, on the other hand it seemed to support more hardware. It is worth noting that the ndiswrapper might not support all hardware and to check your compatability list. Also the wireless manufacturers will sometimes shop two different chipsets in the exactly the same shell, with no differentiation between the different versions.
Check out the following HOWTO. This is specific to debian.
Re:This browser is important
on
IE7 Leaked
·
· Score: 1
In a year or so, this browser will have > 70% of the online browser market share. This browser will be the majority's portal onto the web.
No way. Where the hell do you get that figure from?
Ignoring the non-Windows market and the alternative browsers on Windows (which is a signifiant proportion of the browsers used, currently somewhere between 10% and 20%). At the moment there are still quite a lot of people on 2000, NT4 and 98 (which will not support IE7). A lot of these people are not going to upgrade. Even if they do upgrade, it will take some time for it to occur (IT dept testing etc). So that eliminates are reasonable chunk of people. Secondly, even if this is made a critical update for Windows XP, a lot of people won't install it. The only thing you can be sure of is that people buying new machines with Vista will have IE7, and that will be released in the second half of this year.
I'd be surprise if Microsoft is able to get 35% of people using IE7 by the end of year.
Microsoft and Google and Symantec are not the warriors on the spam battle front
Microsoft and Google are at the battelfront. Symantec isn't. Symantec is just a mess. Microsoft and Google are because they are in the business of sending and recieving large amounts of email, Microsoft more so than Google. They deliver email to users. In Microsoft's case, that takes two forms: hotmail and Exchange servers.
Now if Microsoft and Google are able to stop more users from clicking those links (by one means or another), that means less money for the spammers.
How many Microsoft engineers does it take to change a lightbulb? One to the write documentation explaining the new dead lightbulb feature.
Microsoft says it sees things differently. To "solve" the problem for consumers in the short run doesn't require eliminating spam entirely, said Ryan Hamlin, the general manager who oversees the company's anti-spam programs. Rather, he said, the idea is to contain it to the point that its impact on in-boxes is minor.
Of course! When you discover that haven't solved the problem, just redefine the problem so that you have solved it.
That aside, in some ways things have got worse. There is no guarantee that email will actually get delivered now. After it has been through several spam filters, it might actually get to the destination.
Another way that things have got worse, you often don't get notified when an email hasn't reached its destination (for example because you typed the address incorrectly). With the increase of joe job spam email, chances are your domain or email address has been used to spam lots of people, many of whom don't exist. So you get a bunch of bounce messages. Which you train your spam filter to catch... Even if you don't train your spam filter to catch them, the SNR in the bound messages means that they become pretty useless too.
So the problem of spam has not been solved. And Microsoft claiming that it has been "solved" by spam filters just goes to show how little they understand. If they were serious about solving the problem of spam they would un-encumber sender id so that it can be implemented by GPL projects. Instead, clearly attempting to maintain a competative advantage over open source takes priority over beating spam.
Slashdot Mirror
Serpent gets punished. Eve gets "burdened"/punished, and Adam is stuck with them the rest of his time with no additional punishment.
It would appear that Adam does get additional punishment.
"cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life. Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth"
Correction. The second sentence should read:
The first was while it was a minority religion in Medina, the second while it was a majority religion in Mecca.
One of the problems with the Koran is that is was written in 2 "sections". The first was while it was a minority religion in Mecca, the second while it was a majority religion. You have quoted from the first "section", it should be matched with a quote from the second:
"Allah revealed His will to the angels, saying: 'I shall be with you. Give courage to the believers. I shall cast terror into the hearts of the infidels. Strike off their heads, strike off the very tips of their fingers!' That was because they defied Allah and His apostle. He that defies Allah and his apostle shall be sternly punished by Allah." (Sura 8.12-13)
2 of those worms (Slammer and Code Red) related to services that people might want to expose. Namely SQL Server and IIS. So putting them behind a firewall is not necessarily a solution, although patching is.
Operator Overloading In C#.
Operator Overloading in VB.NET Whidbey.
So I was wrong about function overloading, but I am right in saying that VB.Net does not support operator overloading until Whidbey.
Vb.Net doesn't do function/operator overloading (at least until Whiteby). C# does.
(Mootar) morons.
(Mootar) these people who live in my apartment complex are connected to my wireless
(Mootar) they must think they're super-cool hackers by breaking into my completely unsecure network
(Mootar) unfortunatly, the connection works both ways
(Mootar) long story short, they now have loads of horse porn on their computer
bash
In Australia there are some more enlightened ISPs.
When I was setting up house recently I called iiNet to find their policy on running servers off your home connection. The guy had to ask his supervisor, but the supervisor confirmed it is permitted under their TOS.
Oh, and if you are at college writing your thesis, then I highly recommend using LaTeX instead like I did. In terms of typesetting and formatting Word doesn't even come close.
I'd echo that. It also just reduces grief. Everyone I know who has written their thesis in word has had problems. Mostly it screws up the index, or label on figures/tables/etc.
Evolution and Thunderbird have the potential to render Outlook obsolete
They may have the potential to do that, but Thunderbird at least is a hell of a long way from there. I can't seak for Evolution.
OK so IMAP (or IMAP over SSL if you prefer) can replace MAPI. That is *one* of the 3 major functions outlook has performed since Office 2000.
What thunderbird can't do is:
1. shared address book
2. shared calendering/scheduling tools
Expanding on 1, thunderbird can read LDAP address books. I personally had major troubles getting this to work and gave up after a day or so, but from what I have read others have got it working. But it can't write to them. This has been a registered bug for something like a couple of years. Most of that time they seem to have spent working out which LDAP format to use.
And as for 2, until they can sort something neat out to get sunbird to sync with a server and schedule meetings, then it is nothing like what Outlook offers.
You'll also notice that 2 also needs something to run server side, so they'd need support from someone to write some server side code to manage this.
Access is terrible because it does not scale.
The problem is that people build small databases in Access. They work fine so they grow and more functionality is added. Then you hit the wall. Once you hit that wall there is nowhere to go. You can't just upsize to MSSQL.
I think a person without a face is more memorable and recognisable...
It is still really, really dumb.
The person recieving the call has no information as to who is calling them. To find that out, they need to pick up the phone*. On the other hand the person making the call knows who they are calling. Also they initiate the phone call. Therefore they have more control, therefore they should be charged.
* Sure you can use caller ID, but a lot of people I know have hidden numbers and a lot of (wired) phones don't display the number that is calling. I know that in the US you can dial a number first to get your number displayed, but the onus is still on the person making the call. Add to that the fact that companies can have a group of numbers to dial out on. Also more than one person can use the same number to dial out on (eg I might want to talk to my sister but not my parents). The upshot is, you still don't know who is calling you until you pick up the phone.
Police departments have insurance.
Wouldn't it made more sense to sue the fleeing criminal?
You don't understand the first rule of suing someone. You sue the person with the deepest pockets. Who do you think is more likely to be able to pay up, the police department or a criminal?
I'll post some.
1. You can add properties to class instances. That is plain evil.
2. ability to set your own delimiters on comments
3. IMO inconsistent syntax. eg a print is: print [filehandle] , but push is: push(, value). Either use commas or don't, but don't mess about half way there.
4. A massive (and far too complex syntax), with a reliance on cryptic symbols or operators. eg elif, eq (== not good enough for you?), the for opening files, $_.
I actually like the regex stuff (but I am far from an expert in that area). I just don't see why the entire language has to look like that. And yes you can write elegant, clean code in perl is is just quite hard.
Don't give me that TMTOTDI crap. Some of the features should not exist.
No doubt there will be other means.
In my Autralia the state I live in (NSW) has flourine in the water. The state to the North (Queensland) doesn't. Dentists can say they can always tell someone who has move from Queensland to NSW.
Reading Curahee recently, he describes how during training at least one person fell without their parachute opening and survived, but I think this was a relatively low training jump.
Also surely once you reach terminal velocity, surely this becomes moot. I don't know how how you have to go before you reach terminal velocity, but surely after you reach that height, you have an equal chance no matter how much farther up you go. There might be some other unpleasant effects as you go higher (like frostbite). Maybe I am missing something here.
Story from a friend.
He knew a couple who moved to America for a few years (this is from Australia). She was very svelte.
Without changing their diet or activity, she put on a large amount of weight. They worked out what is was because there was so much sugar in *everything*. After moving back to Australia she returned to her normal weight.
We (our family business) charge on average about $2000 with all the costs considered of operating them (electricity, cryogenic liquids, trained personnel, depreciation)
I read that as decapitation. I was surprised to find that was part of the procedure and was in the process of deciding that I didn't want an MRI scan in the near future.
Quite
... ndiswrapper and madwifi.
The two projects have different aims. If I understand it correctly Madwifi aims to have native linux drivers. ndiswrapper works by acting as a wrapper around the windows drivers. So ndiswrapper is less "pure" to the zealots, on the other hand it seemed to support more hardware. It is worth noting that the ndiswrapper might not support all hardware and to check your compatability list. Also the wireless manufacturers will sometimes shop two different chipsets in the exactly the same shell, with no differentiation between the different versions.
Check out the following HOWTO. This is specific to debian.
In a year or so, this browser will have > 70% of the online browser market share. This browser will be the majority's portal onto the web.
No way. Where the hell do you get that figure from?
Ignoring the non-Windows market and the alternative browsers on Windows (which is a signifiant proportion of the browsers used, currently somewhere between 10% and 20%). At the moment there are still quite a lot of people on 2000, NT4 and 98 (which will not support IE7). A lot of these people are not going to upgrade. Even if they do upgrade, it will take some time for it to occur (IT dept testing etc). So that eliminates are reasonable chunk of people. Secondly, even if this is made a critical update for Windows XP, a lot of people won't install it. The only thing you can be sure of is that people buying new machines with Vista will have IE7, and that will be released in the second half of this year.
I'd be surprise if Microsoft is able to get 35% of people using IE7 by the end of year.
Microsoft and Google and Symantec are not the warriors on the spam battle front
Microsoft and Google are at the battelfront. Symantec isn't. Symantec is just a mess. Microsoft and Google are because they are in the business of sending and recieving large amounts of email, Microsoft more so than Google. They deliver email to users. In Microsoft's case, that takes two forms: hotmail and Exchange servers.
Now if Microsoft and Google are able to stop more users from clicking those links (by one means or another), that means less money for the spammers.
How many Microsoft engineers does it take to change a lightbulb? One to the write documentation explaining the new dead lightbulb feature.
Microsoft says it sees things differently. To "solve" the problem for consumers in the short run doesn't require eliminating spam entirely, said Ryan Hamlin, the general manager who oversees the company's anti-spam programs. Rather, he said, the idea is to contain it to the point that its impact on in-boxes is minor.
Of course! When you discover that haven't solved the problem, just redefine the problem so that you have solved it.
That aside, in some ways things have got worse. There is no guarantee that email will actually get delivered now. After it has been through several spam filters, it might actually get to the destination.
Another way that things have got worse, you often don't get notified when an email hasn't reached its destination (for example because you typed the address incorrectly). With the increase of joe job spam email, chances are your domain or email address has been used to spam lots of people, many of whom don't exist. So you get a bunch of bounce messages. Which you train your spam filter to catch... Even if you don't train your spam filter to catch them, the SNR in the bound messages means that they become pretty useless too.
So the problem of spam has not been solved. And Microsoft claiming that it has been "solved" by spam filters just goes to show how little they understand. If they were serious about solving the problem of spam they would un-encumber sender id so that it can be implemented by GPL projects. Instead, clearly attempting to maintain a competative advantage over open source takes priority over beating spam.