The first one sold will probably be followed shortly by a "Cease and Desist" letter from Fox. Fox is pretty famous for shutting down fan websites, even ones that promoted Futurama and the Simpsons.
Of course, someone could always license the image of Bender from Fox. I'd hate to think how much that would cost.
I would think "Get a life" would mean having a sufficient balance of the things on your list such that you are able to afford your fun hobbies without devoting too much time to the things on your list, thus rendering you incapable of finding the time to do your fun hobbies.
Pretty much anybody who says "Get a life" is passing judgement on your priorities and needs to be told to f*ck off.
Just like the "Star Wars" movies, there will be a neverending succession of uncut, unabridged uncut, studio outtake unabridged uncut, digitally remastered, 14.8 percent new content rereleases...Spaced 6 months apart. And you'll buy them all! MWahahahaha!!!
Douglas Adams may have been an atheist, but I wouldn't use quotes from a work of nonfiction intended to be funny as proof of his religion. The Babelfish may prove non-existence of God in the mad up Universe of HHGttG, but the Babelfish doesn't exist in our world (no fair posting AltaVista links), so by that argument, God COULD exist in our world. Also, listing several fiction works by a fictional author in a fictional universe does not make one an atheist, either. Heck, I list ACTUAL books by REAL Atheists in my amazon bookstore, and that doesn't make me an atheist.
All of Adams' references to God were in order to get a chuckle, and not as a comment on the existence or lack thereof of God.
Or maybe you were being faceticious, I can't really tell by your post.
As a list manager, I also have to deal with people who double opted in to my list, and now complain that it is spam. Plus I get to look at hundreds of bounce e-mails a day, many of which contain wording indicating that, rather than unsubscribe, they simply decided to block the sender. Way to go people. To save yourself typing twenty or thirty characters, you'll just go ahead and waste double the bandwidth by letting it bounce for the rest of infinity.
I use regular expressions based on those and other phrase which will not match the phrase, but will match l33t versions of the phrase and also words like remove, order, quit, no more, and other words with symbols tossed between each character. It works very well.
As a bonus, it also filters out people who aren't spammers, but use lots of l33t-speak.
The plain version of those phrases is not a good search filter, because if you have subscribed to any legitimate mailing lists, they are almost certain to have those phrases. But you've already added thos to your preprocessor whitelist, right?
It's not from someone you know, and it contains an image. Spam go bye-bye.
Of course you run the risk that some friend that you don't have in your whitelist sends you an e-mail with a picture in it. But then you probably don't want to communicate with people who think it is acceptable to send pictures in e-mail.
I agree. Rather than spending any time in jail, he should just be forced to pay everyone he has sent a spam e-mail $1 per instance in compensation for stealing their time. And this judgement should not be allowed to be dismissed in a bankruptcy proceeding.
Eliminating spam could be free, if it weren't for the 2 idiots out of 1 million who actually buy the spammers products.
And while we're talking about the high cost of eliminating spam, what about the high cost of maintaing the e-mail system, of which 60% of so is used only for sending spam, according to a recent slashdot article. The cost of all of that infrastructure increases our taxes, and the price of consumer goods and services. Therefore, I contend that filtering is not a solution, since it only eliminates the end-user inconvenience, not the cost of the infrastructure used to convey the spam.
So currently 63% of e-mail users have gotten a porn spam, while a year ago 71% of email-users have gotten a porn spam.
So did we have a uge influx of new e-mail users, a huge die off in old e-mail users, or is somebody manipulating statistics again?
>If the daylight hours coincide with most people's work schedule then it will use less electricity.
At home, perhaps, but then you will be using more electricity at work, since companies feel the need to cool their buildings to 55 degrees in the summer and heat them to 85 degrees in the winter.
Also, more people would drive during the day, which is worse for pollution than driving at night.
>A hole in a compressed air tank equals instant explosion.
Explosive decompression perhaps. It's compressed air, not compressed propellant gases.
>life isn't like hollywood, not every car crash ends in a massive petrol explosion (or four... how many tanks do they keep in those cars?),
One for each angle.
This reminds me. Exactly how much air are we talking about putting in these tanks? If I read correctly, 1000 pounds of pressurized air would require a Hazmat license.
Sounds fine to me, but then why does every body get to learn about the scientific theories, but only those lucky enough to attend a Church get to hear the evolutionary theories? How about we have a class on religion in schools as well. It could teach kids many different religions and let them decide for themselves which, if any, to believe.
I agree. When I read this article, I am appalled by what appears to me a mockery of thinking outside of accepted standards. I'm not talking about the evolutionary theory here, although they are plainly slapping people of faith in the face. But they even go so far as to mock people for not believing the majority accepted theory of global warming. How can a legitimate scientific magazine preemptively mock any attempt of disproving the theory of Global Warming? It makes the peer review process sound like a social, or even religious club. You believe like we believe or you don't get to play with us. It's disgusting.
>Because all the theory of "Intelligent Design" says, is, "since I don't understand how this could have evolved, it must have be designed, not evolved."
One could also turn that around and say that since science can not understand how a being could have designed all these creatures, then they must have evolved.
Again, every time sone brings up a faith based theory, Science presumes itself to be correct by saying that faith based theories must use science to prove themselves correct. If religion believes that the scientific tools are flawed, then why would religion want to use those tools to prove itself correct? That's like me saying your colored pencils are not as good as my crayons, and you saying to prove it using only your colored pencils.
>a `theory' in the sense of the theory that the world is run by giant shape changing lizards.
Well, no. They all changed shapes into birds and regular sized lizards and now the shape changing monkeys rule the earth.
Slashdot Mirror
As the center of the universe, we demand that you spell center the way we spell it.
The United States: Love us or hate us. You can't ignore us.
Come on. What are the odds of L.A. still being around in 2035?
The first one sold will probably be followed shortly by a "Cease and Desist" letter from Fox. Fox is pretty famous for shutting down fan websites, even ones that promoted Futurama and the Simpsons.
Of course, someone could always license the image of Bender from Fox. I'd hate to think how much that would cost.
I would think "Get a life" would mean having a sufficient balance of the things on your list such that you are able to afford your fun hobbies without devoting too much time to the things on your list, thus rendering you incapable of finding the time to do your fun hobbies.
Pretty much anybody who says "Get a life" is passing judgement on your priorities and needs to be told to f*ck off.
That does sound like a hard part to cast. I'd bet it was a 21.5 to 22 at least.
Just like the "Star Wars" movies, there will be a neverending succession of uncut, unabridged uncut, studio outtake unabridged uncut, digitally remastered, 14.8 percent new content rereleases...Spaced 6 months apart. And you'll buy them all! MWahahahaha!!!
Douglas Adams may have been an atheist, but I wouldn't use quotes from a work of nonfiction intended to be funny as proof of his religion. The Babelfish may prove non-existence of God in the mad up Universe of HHGttG, but the Babelfish doesn't exist in our world (no fair posting AltaVista links), so by that argument, God COULD exist in our world. Also, listing several fiction works by a fictional author in a fictional universe does not make one an atheist, either. Heck, I list ACTUAL books by REAL Atheists in my amazon bookstore, and that doesn't make me an atheist.
All of Adams' references to God were in order to get a chuckle, and not as a comment on the existence or lack thereof of God.
Or maybe you were being faceticious, I can't really tell by your post.
As a list manager, I also have to deal with people who double opted in to my list, and now complain that it is spam. Plus I get to look at hundreds of bounce e-mails a day, many of which contain wording indicating that, rather than unsubscribe, they simply decided to block the sender. Way to go people. To save yourself typing twenty or thirty characters, you'll just go ahead and waste double the bandwidth by letting it bounce for the rest of infinity.
I use regular expressions based on those and other phrase which will not match the phrase, but will match l33t versions of the phrase and also words like remove, order, quit, no more, and other words with symbols tossed between each character. It works very well.
As a bonus, it also filters out people who aren't spammers, but use lots of l33t-speak.
The plain version of those phrases is not a good search filter, because if you have subscribed to any legitimate mailing lists, they are almost certain to have those phrases. But you've already added thos to your preprocessor whitelist, right?
Is it painful to know that your ISP would cost you much less if the infrastructure to support the 60% volume of email which is spam were not in place?
It's not from someone you know, and it contains an image. Spam go bye-bye.
Of course you run the risk that some friend that you don't have in your whitelist sends you an e-mail with a picture in it. But then you probably don't want to communicate with people who think it is acceptable to send pictures in e-mail.
I agree. Rather than spending any time in jail, he should just be forced to pay everyone he has sent a spam e-mail $1 per instance in compensation for stealing their time. And this judgement should not be allowed to be dismissed in a bankruptcy proceeding.
Eliminating spam could be free, if it weren't for the 2 idiots out of 1 million who actually buy the spammers products.
And while we're talking about the high cost of eliminating spam, what about the high cost of maintaing the e-mail system, of which 60% of so is used only for sending spam, according to a recent slashdot article. The cost of all of that infrastructure increases our taxes, and the price of consumer goods and services. Therefore, I contend that filtering is not a solution, since it only eliminates the end-user inconvenience, not the cost of the infrastructure used to convey the spam.
So currently 63% of e-mail users have gotten a porn spam, while a year ago 71% of email-users have gotten a porn spam.
So did we have a uge influx of new e-mail users, a huge die off in old e-mail users, or is somebody manipulating statistics again?
>If the daylight hours coincide with most people's work schedule then it will use less electricity.
At home, perhaps, but then you will be using more electricity at work, since companies feel the need to cool their buildings to 55 degrees in the summer and heat them to 85 degrees in the winter.
Also, more people would drive during the day, which is worse for pollution than driving at night.
>A hole in a compressed air tank equals instant explosion.
Explosive decompression perhaps. It's compressed air, not compressed propellant gases.
>life isn't like hollywood, not every car crash ends in a massive petrol explosion (or four... how many tanks do they keep in those cars?),
One for each angle.
This reminds me. Exactly how much air are we talking about putting in these tanks? If I read correctly, 1000 pounds of pressurized air would require a Hazmat license.
What does one do with a cut off peice of air hose?
Sounds fine to me, but then why does every body get to learn about the scientific theories, but only those lucky enough to attend a Church get to hear the evolutionary theories? How about we have a class on religion in schools as well. It could teach kids many different religions and let them decide for themselves which, if any, to believe.
I agree. When I read this article, I am appalled by what appears to me a mockery of thinking outside of accepted standards. I'm not talking about the evolutionary theory here, although they are plainly slapping people of faith in the face. But they even go so far as to mock people for not believing the majority accepted theory of global warming. How can a legitimate scientific magazine preemptively mock any attempt of disproving the theory of Global Warming? It makes the peer review process sound like a social, or even religious club. You believe like we believe or you don't get to play with us. It's disgusting.
Moderation should only be done in moderation.
Myself, I've always found it best to keep an open mind, but not open enough where your it falls out.
>Because all the theory of "Intelligent Design" says, is, "since I don't understand how this could have evolved, it must have be designed, not evolved."
One could also turn that around and say that since science can not understand how a being could have designed all these creatures, then they must have evolved.
Again, every time sone brings up a faith based theory, Science presumes itself to be correct by saying that faith based theories must use science to prove themselves correct. If religion believes that the scientific tools are flawed, then why would religion want to use those tools to prove itself correct? That's like me saying your colored pencils are not as good as my crayons, and you saying to prove it using only your colored pencils.
>a `theory' in the sense of the theory that the world is run by giant shape changing lizards.
Well, no. They all changed shapes into birds and regular sized lizards and now the shape changing monkeys rule the earth.