To everyone suggesting experience is superior to certifications and education, I completely agree. Unfortunately third party head hunting contractors hired by Fortune 500 human resource departments do not.
Your experience, intelligence and charisma will impress the hiring manager and might even get you the job, but.. you never got to meet him/her because you got rejected by the asshole third party headhunting contractor because your resume was not bit for bit identical to the job posting, even if you're an internal candidate for Christ's sake. Back in the good ol' days you could probably convince a human resources associate that even though you don't have required certification X, experience Y makes up for this. Today, that human resources rep has been replaced by a third party contractor whose job is to thrash through the thousands of resumes and present 25 precisely qualified candidates to the hiring manager. The hiring manager will never see any "maybes" or "close enoughs" or "willing to settles".
My advice is to hand tailor your resume to the specific job posting each time you submit it. If a job requires a certification or degree, you'd better have it. If it says "or equivalent experience", I'd put an "Experience Equivalent to Certification X" section right up top on my resume and emotionally prepare myself to be bumped by the hundreds of other candidates that actually have Certification X.
If you have Certification Y and the job posting doesn't mention Certification Y as a requirement or a desirable, leave it off. If you can get through the phone interview with the headhunter and get an interview with the hiring manager, this might be a great time to bring up Certification Y, but to a third party headhunter, superfluous education/certification can only over-qualify you. While suggesting you have a certification that you do not is dishonest and immoral, I've never heard of anyone getting fired from McDonald's because they forgot to mention that they graduated magna cum laude from Princeton.
If you are lucky enough to be happily employed I'd recommend taking every opportunity your employer offers to obtain education at their expense. Even if you don't need it now, having a vast portfolio of degrees and certifications will empower you to craft precisely targeted resumes in the future
If you are unemployed or looking to switch, I would hit every job posting for which I am precisely qualified first, then target jobs for which I am over-qualified at companies that will have much opportunity for advancement. If you are unemployed and under-educated/certified, target entry level positions at companies that will pay for or assist with training and education. "Does the hiring company offer education assistance?" is always a good question to ask a jack ass headhunter.
No flames here. I agree with you. Manned missions are a pretty much a waste of money and, most unfortunately, lives.
What aren't wastes of money are the Mars rovers. I'd love to see hundreds of those little buggers buzzing around the solar system.
I was hoping to see a budget increase for that program and more programs like it. Can anyone shed light on the future of the Mars Rovers? Maybe a Mars Rover Tow Truck to get Spirit unstuck from the mud?
I have seen dozens of fuel efficient concepts from VW in the past couple of years but so far I haven't seen anything hit the showroom floor, at least not in the states. Flipping through my DasAuto marketing bullshit magazine, I see an SUV and a Minivan. Not exactly a fuel efficient line-up for 2010, if you ask me. The Diesel Jetta is a step in the right direction, but again, it's not on the lots yet.
That being said, I saw this interesting little car floating around the blogohedron a couple weeks ago. I'll let you rtfa, but if this hits the US showrooms in 2010, I suspect it will be a Volt killer. Also, it's not hideously ugly.
Long story short, I am so fucking tired of waiting on this shit. At least in the Golf Twin Drive, Germany is putting some money behind it. As much as I hate corporate subsidies, governments need to make some incentives for getting SUVs and Minivans off the roads, and fuel efficient compacts on the roads because consumers apparently aren't interested, or if they are, the car makers aren't hearing them or don't care.
YouTube Happens
on
I Will Derive
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You can't hide from it, and that's OK. It's not so bad guys. You may be disgusted now, but if the past decade has taught us anything it's that people can tolerate a lot of shit before it actually motivates them to action.
In St. Louis, it took a 100% increase in gas prices to motivate people actually start carpooling, up ~30% recently. Every dime increase instigated vocal outrage, but little to no action. But when it starts eating into our beer budgets, then we call Ride-Finders.
Slashdot has jumped the shark about 30 times now, and we still read it, we still participate. Heck, this is the first post I've been motivated to comment on in quite some time.
All you youtube player haters best just chill. If you hate it so bad, it's a relatively free internet for the time being (legislation pending). Go start your own slashcode site with zero youtubes. We'll be right behind you in the other car. No seriously. We're not going to ditch you, honest.
Have the child pick a number, 0-9. Let's say "7". The child's password would then be "7ujm&UJM". This is not my password.
Notice how this password is simply the 7 key followed by the 3 keys beneath the 7, then repeated holding the shift key.
Alternatives could be "7890&*()", "7654&^%$" or slightly more complex patterns like "7ui8&UI*". This way the child has an effective password and only has to remember a single number and a simple shape or pattern. Even if the child forgets one or the other, it could be determined in a handful of guesses.
Here is a list of things people who wish to support open source software should be doing with their money, sorted by priority.
1. Donate directly to open source developers.
2. Donate directly to open source project organizers, moderators, user supporters, testers and bug reporters.
3. Donate directly to open source projects that you don't use.
4. Donate to EFF and/or FSF.
5. Donate to scholarship funds.
6. Burn your money in a trash can.
7. Donate to Tux 500 or SpreadFirefox
Campaigns like SpreadFirefox and Tux 500 are bad for OSS. They takes money that could be going to open source projects and give it to newspapers and (in this case) crashy car drivers.
Some open source developers will reject compensation, others will welcome it. In my opinion, they get first dibs on any money coming in.
Next in priority is tackling the administrative costs of operating an open source project, namely compensating the individuals and institutions that volunteer time and effort and bandwidth maintaining servers and moderating forums, etc.
If you feel you've given amply to all the projects you love and use and can't think of anything better to do with your money, why not support a project that you don't use? Or perhaps even a project that you dislike? Linux supporters support FreeBSD and vice versa. At least then the money stays in the community.
EFF and FSF are great organizations that need your bucks. EFF protects your favorite project from frivolous imaginary patent lawsuits and FSF promotes OSS intelligently.
If you still have money to burn, give it to scholarship funds or schools to help foster the education of the next generation of open source developers.
If after all that you've still got cash in your pocket, Mr. Gates, then you have RMS' permission to burn it or give it to other worthy causes, but for the love of God please do not support campaigns like SpreadFirefox and Tux 500 or any other campaign that aims to "get the word out" or crap like that because when push comes to shove, it's just writing a check to the New York Times instead of the hard working people who make your favorite open source project possible.
Was that not my exact secondary point? Would you like for me to say it a third time? We both agree that linux is hard and win/mac is easy. Issue settled.
My primary point is that linux and FOSS in general SHOULD be hard and strive for excellence not usability.
I think this thread is pretty much done. If you'd like to continue the discussion in private, feel free to email me.
Fascinating. You seem to be taking this a far too personally.
Perhaps you can explain why if linux dissatisfies you so, why you continue to use it.
I like how you pointed out how you were able to copy your samba configuration and reuse it. How exactly do you backup your windows network share configuration? Do you do a print screen? It must be frustrating if you have dozens of shares to configure. Again, let me preemptivly point out that I neither use samba nor windows networking and am sincerely interested. By the way, a quick google search has turned up a couple dozen graphical samba configurators.
I understand your sentiment that you don't want to have to become an expert in CUPS to print a simple page, but I ask you, is it really so simple to configure a printer in windows, or is it just that you're more familiar with windows. I had to install a printer at work about a week ago (windows) and let me say, I was a complete bumbling retard. No sweat for me in linux. Perhaps it's not so much that one is better than the other, but that one is unfamiliar.
I started using linux because I sought a challenge. I'm more interested in power, flexibility, and freedom. If you "want to do my stuff and nothing in my way", that's why they make macs.
Are you suggesting that I personally am somehow preventing people from designing a GUI for linux that doesn't suck?
It appears that you're very angry about editing text files. I would place you in the "point-n-click" community I mentioned above. If it's not 3d, shiney, and makes a beep when I click on it with my wireless mouse, then it's too hard. Don't think I'm not sympathetic. I understand that text is intimidating for people born after DOS.
SMB? That's windows networking stuff. Fine. Let us discuss why "Point, Click, Done!" is inferior to actually reading a man page and understanding what you're doing. What are the security settings on the folder you just shared? Did you share it for everyone on the computer? Everyone on your LAN? Everyone on the Internet? Did you share all the subfolders? Did the subfolders contain any links to other folders? Can people on the internet write to my share? Hey! SexyBoobies.EXE! Awesome.. CLICK!
You're obviously a windows user attempting to transition to linux. I applaud you, but you're not yet a linux user. You're trying to force linux to fit your ideals of what an operating system should be (windows). I used to be (and still am) a windows user, and I understand how difficult it is to shake your preconceived notions, but if you keep using linux you'll eventually discover that text isn't scary and is actually amazingly empowering.
I'm honored that you think I speak for the all of the linux community, but really I'm just expressing my personal opinion. It is my feeling that linux is hard. Some people (present company included) may be better off with other systems. It is also my opinion that the less I have to touch my mouse, the better. I wish I could get to the point where I could throw it away altogether, but I'm not quite there.
How close are you to your goal of throwing away your keyboard?
What is this obsession people have with linux being accepted mainstream? What Raymond claims is true, if linux (and FOSS in general) wants to be adopted mainstream it's needs to compromise it's ideals.
But maybe linux doesn't need to be mainstream. Operating systems tend to be developed to accomodate the lowest commond denominator. Microsoft has a lot of grandmas and grandpas with eMachines to satisfy. Apple has a lot of clueless art students to "empower". If linux's lowest common denominator is a bunch of Klingons, that's a good thing.
If linux's demographic was magically expanded to include grandma, grandpa and emo art students that aren't willing to learn how to compile a kernel, it would have to contend with the point-and-click, plug-and-play mentality of it's clueless user base, meaning that developers would be forced to spend time making linux idiot proof instead of optimizing, debugging, enhancing and advancing.
I, on the other hand, would encourage linux, and all open source projects to minimize their user bases. I'm not suggesting that FOSS should be kept a secret, but you certainly don't have to waste resources buying an idiotic full page ad in the New York Times. A good open source project (like a good democracy) demands an educated user base, not a herd of people who do things because advertisments tell them to.
That being said, there's no reason you can't have linux for stupid people (ubuntu (no offense, I use ubuntu)) and linux for smart people (freebsd, ha). That's the beauty of open source software.
In summary, if you already use linux and you still bought an ipod instead of the countless non-DRM, usbstorage friendly media players that are better and cheaper, then you are stupid and you should probably buy a mac. If you already own an ipod and you want to get into linux, life sucks, get started reverse engineering iTunes.
What do the people who program the IDEs use? I guess the guy who wrote the first IDE used vi, but what did the guy who wrote vi use? It boggles the mind.
One could relativly inexpensivly and safely test this in a wind tunnel. Of course this is one of those things that is technically true, but not practically. Downforce can easily be measured on an upright car at speed, and if the downforce generated is greater than the weight of the car at rest, then in theory, it would drive upside down. But it would also lose traction and slide out of control and explode.
"The app installer itself is only 16 MB, ReBirth uses a copy protection scheme which involves a 128 MB data file on the CD. It's actually a nonsense file that contains just random data, but ReBirth won't boot without it. The rest of the CD isn't really necessary, but includes a Mac partition (which has roughly the same files including another instance of the 128 MB data file), and lastly there are 3 audio tracks that showcase ReBirth if you put it in a CD player."
Anyone can modify a Wiki, and anyone who thinks a Wiki is some perfect document free of unsavory influence is a dullard. I would be more concerned if marketing DID NOT find it's way into a Wiki. Look around you. Right above me as I type I am bombarded with logos and ads and OSDN navigation bars (or I would be if they wern't disabled or AdBlocked). Marketing is so much a part of our lives, there would be something wrong with the openness of Wikipedia if marketing did not find it's way inside.
I hate ads as much as the next guy, but you're not going to stop this practice by broadcasting it on/. for every tom, dick, and harry to read. Just mark it for deletion and move on. It appears the BBC didn't really sanction this, but, now that marketers have seen the kind of press this has gotten, they're going to be all over it now. And then it will become ineffective and they'll move on to something else. It won't ruin Wikipedia anymore than subscriptions ruined slashdot.
Libraries are for grown-ups, too. Adult images aren't illegal. Libraries aren't day-care centers, although I think that's what some people expect them to be. If I am forbidden to look at boobies on the internet at my local library, will I soon be forbidden from looking at boobies on African tribeswomen in the National Geographic on the shelf behind the computer? Or at the boobies in a book on art? Or read a description of boobies in a poetry book? There's a whole bunch of adult situations in that there bible these assholes are always thumping. Maybe we should censor that, too.
In a million years, when the alien archeologists are picking through the remains of our society, they're going to have a hard time figuring out how we reproduced. "Well Xzgralfap, they documented the reproductive practices of every other species on the planet and labeled it 'biology'. But they're own reproductive practices were labeled 'pornography' and forbidden to be documented and studied by the ignorant."
I'm tired of it. Mary Carey for President, 2008. Her and Bill Clinton are the only two pro-pornography candidates I can think of. Don't forget to order your save the court kit, today!
This is outrageous. There's absolutly no law against non-profit organizations seeking, earning, and keeping revenue. The real story here is that Mozilla has become profitable, and is moving so that those in control can take advantage of it. This is not how successful open source projects should behave. They should not beg for donations so they can advertize (see spreadfirefox), and any profits they earn should go back into the project, then to the developers, and then into the open source community.
Let me preface my next statement by saying that I love and use firefox exclusivly, but it's time for firefox to fork so it stops fucking up the mozilla foundation.
Gun companies, generally speaking, only promote legitimate and legal uses for their products. It's legal to own a gun, use it for practice, sport, hunting, and self-defense, but not to kill innocent bystanders. You'd be hard pressed to get an NRA member to admit that more than a handful of guns are legitimatly sold to someone with criminal intent. On the other hand, in the deluge of pirated material flowing over p2p networks, you'd be hard pressed to find the haldful of users with no criminal intent.
I would be interested in seeing a p2p network started exclusivly for legitimate uses. One that activly bans users who attempt to share or obtain copyrighted or any other illegal information, no matter how beneign it is. I think this is an important step in establishing the legitimacy of p2p.
On a side note, I would argue that manufacturing assault weapons and armor piercing bullets would constitute a similar intention for a product's consumer to break laws as a p2p application producer and therefore should be illegal. And in some instances it is.
Slashdot Mirror
Why did we skip three digit years?
Well, WebOS runs anywhere linux does.. so.. ?
To everyone suggesting experience is superior to certifications and education, I completely agree. Unfortunately third party head hunting contractors hired by Fortune 500 human resource departments do not.
Your experience, intelligence and charisma will impress the hiring manager and might even get you the job, but.. you never got to meet him/her because you got rejected by the asshole third party headhunting contractor because your resume was not bit for bit identical to the job posting, even if you're an internal candidate for Christ's sake. Back in the good ol' days you could probably convince a human resources associate that even though you don't have required certification X, experience Y makes up for this. Today, that human resources rep has been replaced by a third party contractor whose job is to thrash through the thousands of resumes and present 25 precisely qualified candidates to the hiring manager. The hiring manager will never see any "maybes" or "close enoughs" or "willing to settles".
My advice is to hand tailor your resume to the specific job posting each time you submit it. If a job requires a certification or degree, you'd better have it. If it says "or equivalent experience", I'd put an "Experience Equivalent to Certification X" section right up top on my resume and emotionally prepare myself to be bumped by the hundreds of other candidates that actually have Certification X.
If you have Certification Y and the job posting doesn't mention Certification Y as a requirement or a desirable, leave it off. If you can get through the phone interview with the headhunter and get an interview with the hiring manager, this might be a great time to bring up Certification Y, but to a third party headhunter, superfluous education/certification can only over-qualify you. While suggesting you have a certification that you do not is dishonest and immoral, I've never heard of anyone getting fired from McDonald's because they forgot to mention that they graduated magna cum laude from Princeton.
If you are lucky enough to be happily employed I'd recommend taking every opportunity your employer offers to obtain education at their expense. Even if you don't need it now, having a vast portfolio of degrees and certifications will empower you to craft precisely targeted resumes in the future
If you are unemployed or looking to switch, I would hit every job posting for which I am precisely qualified first, then target jobs for which I am over-qualified at companies that will have much opportunity for advancement. If you are unemployed and under-educated/certified, target entry level positions at companies that will pay for or assist with training and education. "Does the hiring company offer education assistance?" is always a good question to ask a jack ass headhunter.
RomRaider is available for Subaru vehicles.
No flames here. I agree with you. Manned missions are a pretty much a waste of money and, most unfortunately, lives.
What aren't wastes of money are the Mars rovers. I'd love to see hundreds of those little buggers buzzing around the solar system.
I was hoping to see a budget increase for that program and more programs like it. Can anyone shed light on the future of the Mars Rovers? Maybe a Mars Rover Tow Truck to get Spirit unstuck from the mud?
I have seen dozens of fuel efficient concepts from VW in the past couple of years but so far I haven't seen anything hit the showroom floor, at least not in the states. Flipping through my DasAuto marketing bullshit magazine, I see an SUV and a Minivan. Not exactly a fuel efficient line-up for 2010, if you ask me. The Diesel Jetta is a step in the right direction, but again, it's not on the lots yet.
That being said, I saw this interesting little car floating around the blogohedron a couple weeks ago. I'll let you rtfa, but if this hits the US showrooms in 2010, I suspect it will be a Volt killer. Also, it's not hideously ugly.
Long story short, I am so fucking tired of waiting on this shit. At least in the Golf Twin Drive, Germany is putting some money behind it. As much as I hate corporate subsidies, governments need to make some incentives for getting SUVs and Minivans off the roads, and fuel efficient compacts on the roads because consumers apparently aren't interested, or if they are, the car makers aren't hearing them or don't care.
You can't hide from it, and that's OK. It's not so bad guys. You may be disgusted now, but if the past decade has taught us anything it's that people can tolerate a lot of shit before it actually motivates them to action.
In St. Louis, it took a 100% increase in gas prices to motivate people actually start carpooling, up ~30% recently. Every dime increase instigated vocal outrage, but little to no action. But when it starts eating into our beer budgets, then we call Ride-Finders.
Slashdot has jumped the shark about 30 times now, and we still read it, we still participate. Heck, this is the first post I've been motivated to comment on in quite some time.
All you youtube player haters best just chill. If you hate it so bad, it's a relatively free internet for the time being (legislation pending). Go start your own slashcode site with zero youtubes. We'll be right behind you in the other car. No seriously. We're not going to ditch you, honest.
Have the child pick a number, 0-9. Let's say "7". The child's password would then be "7ujm&UJM". This is not my password.
Notice how this password is simply the 7 key followed by the 3 keys beneath the 7, then repeated holding the shift key.
Alternatives could be "7890&*()", "7654&^%$" or slightly more complex patterns like "7ui8&UI*". This way the child has an effective password and only has to remember a single number and a simple shape or pattern. Even if the child forgets one or the other, it could be determined in a handful of guesses.
opsound.org has indexes Creative Commons audio. Lots of good stuff.
I'm also going to shout out to anal0g.org and sudd.org
Here is a list of things people who wish to support open source software should be doing with their money, sorted by priority.
1. Donate directly to open source developers.
2. Donate directly to open source project organizers, moderators, user supporters, testers and bug reporters.
3. Donate directly to open source projects that you don't use.
4. Donate to EFF and/or FSF.
5. Donate to scholarship funds.
6. Burn your money in a trash can.
7. Donate to Tux 500 or SpreadFirefox
Campaigns like SpreadFirefox and Tux 500 are bad for OSS. They takes money that could be going to open source projects and give it to newspapers and (in this case) crashy car drivers.
Some open source developers will reject compensation, others will welcome it. In my opinion, they get first dibs on any money coming in.
Next in priority is tackling the administrative costs of operating an open source project, namely compensating the individuals and institutions that volunteer time and effort and bandwidth maintaining servers and moderating forums, etc.
If you feel you've given amply to all the projects you love and use and can't think of anything better to do with your money, why not support a project that you don't use? Or perhaps even a project that you dislike? Linux supporters support FreeBSD and vice versa. At least then the money stays in the community.
EFF and FSF are great organizations that need your bucks. EFF protects your favorite project from frivolous imaginary patent lawsuits and FSF promotes OSS intelligently.
If you still have money to burn, give it to scholarship funds or schools to help foster the education of the next generation of open source developers.
If after all that you've still got cash in your pocket, Mr. Gates, then you have RMS' permission to burn it or give it to other worthy causes, but for the love of God please do not support campaigns like SpreadFirefox and Tux 500 or any other campaign that aims to "get the word out" or crap like that because when push comes to shove, it's just writing a check to the New York Times instead of the hard working people who make your favorite open source project possible.
Thanks,
_aa_
That being said, I will never see it, because it will suck.
Was that not my exact secondary point? Would you like for me to say it a third time? We both agree that linux is hard and win/mac is easy. Issue settled.
My primary point is that linux and FOSS in general SHOULD be hard and strive for excellence not usability.
I think this thread is pretty much done. If you'd like to continue the discussion in private, feel free to email me.
Fascinating. You seem to be taking this a far too personally.
Perhaps you can explain why if linux dissatisfies you so, why you continue to use it.
I like how you pointed out how you were able to copy your samba configuration and reuse it. How exactly do you backup your windows network share configuration? Do you do a print screen? It must be frustrating if you have dozens of shares to configure. Again, let me preemptivly point out that I neither use samba nor windows networking and am sincerely interested. By the way, a quick google search has turned up a couple dozen graphical samba configurators.
I understand your sentiment that you don't want to have to become an expert in CUPS to print a simple page, but I ask you, is it really so simple to configure a printer in windows, or is it just that you're more familiar with windows. I had to install a printer at work about a week ago (windows) and let me say, I was a complete bumbling retard. No sweat for me in linux. Perhaps it's not so much that one is better than the other, but that one is unfamiliar.
I started using linux because I sought a challenge. I'm more interested in power, flexibility, and freedom. If you "want to do my stuff and nothing in my way", that's why they make macs.
Thanks for the information. I was merely using ipods as an example. I have never owned one.
Are you suggesting that I personally am somehow preventing people from designing a GUI for linux that doesn't suck?
It appears that you're very angry about editing text files. I would place you in the "point-n-click" community I mentioned above. If it's not 3d, shiney, and makes a beep when I click on it with my wireless mouse, then it's too hard. Don't think I'm not sympathetic. I understand that text is intimidating for people born after DOS.
SMB? That's windows networking stuff. Fine. Let us discuss why "Point, Click, Done!" is inferior to actually reading a man page and understanding what you're doing. What are the security settings on the folder you just shared? Did you share it for everyone on the computer? Everyone on your LAN? Everyone on the Internet? Did you share all the subfolders? Did the subfolders contain any links to other folders? Can people on the internet write to my share? Hey! SexyBoobies.EXE! Awesome.. CLICK!
You're obviously a windows user attempting to transition to linux. I applaud you, but you're not yet a linux user. You're trying to force linux to fit your ideals of what an operating system should be (windows). I used to be (and still am) a windows user, and I understand how difficult it is to shake your preconceived notions, but if you keep using linux you'll eventually discover that text isn't scary and is actually amazingly empowering.
I'm honored that you think I speak for the all of the linux community, but really I'm just expressing my personal opinion. It is my feeling that linux is hard. Some people (present company included) may be better off with other systems. It is also my opinion that the less I have to touch my mouse, the better. I wish I could get to the point where I could throw it away altogether, but I'm not quite there.
How close are you to your goal of throwing away your keyboard?
What is this obsession people have with linux being accepted mainstream? What Raymond claims is true, if linux (and FOSS in general) wants to be adopted mainstream it's needs to compromise it's ideals.
But maybe linux doesn't need to be mainstream. Operating systems tend to be developed to accomodate the lowest commond denominator. Microsoft has a lot of grandmas and grandpas with eMachines to satisfy. Apple has a lot of clueless art students to "empower". If linux's lowest common denominator is a bunch of Klingons, that's a good thing.
If linux's demographic was magically expanded to include grandma, grandpa and emo art students that aren't willing to learn how to compile a kernel, it would have to contend with the point-and-click, plug-and-play mentality of it's clueless user base, meaning that developers would be forced to spend time making linux idiot proof instead of optimizing, debugging, enhancing and advancing.
I, on the other hand, would encourage linux, and all open source projects to minimize their user bases. I'm not suggesting that FOSS should be kept a secret, but you certainly don't have to waste resources buying an idiotic full page ad in the New York Times. A good open source project (like a good democracy) demands an educated user base, not a herd of people who do things because advertisments tell them to.
That being said, there's no reason you can't have linux for stupid people (ubuntu (no offense, I use ubuntu)) and linux for smart people (freebsd, ha). That's the beauty of open source software.
In summary, if you already use linux and you still bought an ipod instead of the countless non-DRM, usbstorage friendly media players that are better and cheaper, then you are stupid and you should probably buy a mac. If you already own an ipod and you want to get into linux, life sucks, get started reverse engineering iTunes.
IRC4Life!
/quote nickserv identify [passwd] or on most clients just /nickserv identify [passwd]
Also, back in the day, on Dalnet one could use
I'm not certain if this is done on Freenode, but it helped prevent passwords from being hijacked via situations like this or a simple typo.
What do the people who program the IDEs use? I guess the guy who wrote the first IDE used vi, but what did the guy who wrote vi use? It boggles the mind.
One could relativly inexpensivly and safely test this in a wind tunnel. Of course this is one of those things that is technically true, but not practically. Downforce can easily be measured on an upright car at speed, and if the downforce generated is greater than the weight of the car at rest, then in theory, it would drive upside down. But it would also lose traction and slide out of control and explode.
Check out this post from musicthing.
"The app installer itself is only 16 MB, ReBirth uses a copy protection scheme which involves a 128 MB data file on the CD. It's actually a nonsense file that contains just random data, but ReBirth won't boot without it. The rest of the CD isn't really necessary, but includes a Mac partition (which has roughly the same files including another instance of the 128 MB data file), and lastly there are 3 audio tracks that showcase ReBirth if you put it in a CD player."
Anyone can modify a Wiki, and anyone who thinks a Wiki is some perfect document free of unsavory influence is a dullard. I would be more concerned if marketing DID NOT find it's way into a Wiki. Look around you. Right above me as I type I am bombarded with logos and ads and OSDN navigation bars (or I would be if they wern't disabled or AdBlocked). Marketing is so much a part of our lives, there would be something wrong with the openness of Wikipedia if marketing did not find it's way inside.
/. for every tom, dick, and harry to read. Just mark it for deletion and move on. It appears the BBC didn't really sanction this, but, now that marketers have seen the kind of press this has gotten, they're going to be all over it now. And then it will become ineffective and they'll move on to something else. It won't ruin Wikipedia anymore than subscriptions ruined slashdot.
I hate ads as much as the next guy, but you're not going to stop this practice by broadcasting it on
Libraries are for grown-ups, too. Adult images aren't illegal. Libraries aren't day-care centers, although I think that's what some people expect them to be. If I am forbidden to look at boobies on the internet at my local library, will I soon be forbidden from looking at boobies on African tribeswomen in the National Geographic on the shelf behind the computer? Or at the boobies in a book on art? Or read a description of boobies in a poetry book? There's a whole bunch of adult situations in that there bible these assholes are always thumping. Maybe we should censor that, too.
In a million years, when the alien archeologists are picking through the remains of our society, they're going to have a hard time figuring out how we reproduced. "Well Xzgralfap, they documented the reproductive practices of every other species on the planet and labeled it 'biology'. But they're own reproductive practices were labeled 'pornography' and forbidden to be documented and studied by the ignorant."
I'm tired of it. Mary Carey for President, 2008. Her and Bill Clinton are the only two pro-pornography candidates I can think of. Don't forget to order your save the court kit, today!
This is outrageous. There's absolutly no law against non-profit organizations seeking, earning, and keeping revenue. The real story here is that Mozilla has become profitable, and is moving so that those in control can take advantage of it. This is not how successful open source projects should behave. They should not beg for donations so they can advertize (see spreadfirefox), and any profits they earn should go back into the project, then to the developers, and then into the open source community.
Let me preface my next statement by saying that I love and use firefox exclusivly, but it's time for firefox to fork so it stops fucking up the mozilla foundation.
Gun companies, generally speaking, only promote legitimate and legal uses for their products. It's legal to own a gun, use it for practice, sport, hunting, and self-defense, but not to kill innocent bystanders. You'd be hard pressed to get an NRA member to admit that more than a handful of guns are legitimatly sold to someone with criminal intent. On the other hand, in the deluge of pirated material flowing over p2p networks, you'd be hard pressed to find the haldful of users with no criminal intent.
I would be interested in seeing a p2p network started exclusivly for legitimate uses. One that activly bans users who attempt to share or obtain copyrighted or any other illegal information, no matter how beneign it is. I think this is an important step in establishing the legitimacy of p2p.
On a side note, I would argue that manufacturing assault weapons and armor piercing bullets would constitute a similar intention for a product's consumer to break laws as a p2p application producer and therefore should be illegal. And in some instances it is.
Isn't this what CPU Frequency Scaling is for? I personally use the ondemand scaling governor made available in linux kernel 2.6.10, I believe.