reminds me of the guys who do cakes like this now.
someone recently got a photo from me for a party, took it to the baker where they printed it to a sheet of food dye. They lay that on the cake and it transfers a surprisingly good image into the icing... I think it took a normal-ish printer, though probably special ink and transfer paper
They did have some pretty strong suspicions from the photo evidence from the launch cameras that there *might* be damage... that's why they were all debating it so much while the shuttle was still in orbit. I believe that they decided something between "the tiles couldn't have caused significant damage" and "we'll have to chance it since we can't fix it even if there is minor damage."
If they actually have something they can do about it (and now that they've screwed up once), they'll be more inclined to send an EVA to go look.
Besides, the accident report did stress that nasa needed to beef up their launch camera systems and their systems that can see the shuttle in orbit, so they will have better ways to tell if there is damage... and after the loss of one shuttle and crew, they'll be a lot more careful to check now...
good points. that story stuck out to me more than the rest in this slashback and I was surprised that so few were commenting on it.
If I were in that area, I'd certainly be calling the ISP or boycotting them based on such behavior. And writing letters to the FBI and representative about such poor law enforcement responses.
You'd think the ISP would be better off to say, "ok, you had it uncapped for X hours/days/weeks. We normally charge Y dollars / hour/day/week, so you get an additional charge of X * Y for the extra bandwidth you used, + a fine of $Z. (all of this specified ahead of time in the contract) Calling the FBI to raid is nuts.
Question: if the limit for the FBI to come in is $250,000 then how can it count to consider 23 separate, unrelated people times X dollars to make that amount? Shouldn't each case be considered separately? If each is estimated at $11,000 'damage' (which seems very high), then shouldn't that number be compared to the 250k limit? What legal justification is there to group them together? (somebody has a buddy at the FBI I think)
Lastly, why is it that computer "crimes", even minor ones, so often end up with so much gear being confiscated, even unrelated gear? Is this really legal? How much luck do people have in getting their data and computers back? It seems like un-due process to take the means for someone's work without better recourse, particularly for such a minor 'crime' as this.
Wonder why MS isn't licensing the patent from Eolas ? Perhaps they think that negociating for that would imply that the patent was valid and they aren't willing to do that yet... maybe they are hoping that public pressure over breaking plugins on thousand (millions?) of sites will make Eolas back down... sounds like lawyer games run amok.
The quotes from the cringley article imply that Eolas may not want to license to MS, in some attempt to change the balance of the browser market. If so, it's pretty annoying/arrogant that a one-person company thinks they know what's best for the internet enough to pull that kind of stunt... The costs of website conversions that shouldn't be necessary could run awfully high.
Wonder if anyone has thought of suing Eolas over the fact that they are screwing up their websites, and costing everyone money to convert away from plugins...?
"... isolates the user from all other sensory input. This in theory means the user is not distracted by other things occurring in their immediate surroundings..."
Instead of protecting cell phone users from outside distractions, I want cell phone users to have something that stops them from distracting/annoying others. Maybe we need a portable maxwell-smart-like cone-of-silence that cell-phone users can use when they just *have* to have that (non-) private, loud conversation in a restaurant or other public place...
Perhaps a nice big sound-deadening bag. Put it over their head while they make the call.;-)
for details see these analyses
on
P2P Spam?
·
· Score: 1
I figured I was getting less spam because all the mail servers were busy dealing with tons of 100k-each sobig.f copies. Once sobig slacked off, then I started getting my 'regular' dose of spam again...
anyone know if this did affect things? any numbers?
I did notice a few weeks ago that the spammers suddenly went to using varied, real-sounding names as their From's so that became a little harder to scan-n-delete...
" I'm not worried about Artificial Intelligence, when they invent Artificial Stupidiy, then I'll be scared."
Yeah, well we may have to worry about computers someday being smarter than humans, but we'll NEVER have to worry about them out-dumbing us...
Humans Rule in that area!!!!;-)
The other good news from that study is that they show that spam does decrease after you remove your email address from websites... in other words, they don't keep the addresses as much as we generally believe. You aren't on every spammers list forever just because they get your address once.
yeah, but I don't think they are nearly quiet enough to *sneak* anywhere... and you could take them out with simple technology, like a whack from a broom.;-)
besides, what makes you think the military hasn't had their own RC spy drones already? They are currently in love with the predator and so forth and they do have projects on helicopter versions, though I think they are generally larger than this...
Here's the email I got from my congessman on this issue.
From Sarbanes, Md (senator@sarbanes.senate.gov)
Dear Mr. (name removed):
Thank you for contacting me to express your views about media ownership regulations. I share your concerns and appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this important matter.
On June 2, 2003, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted an order modifying media ownership rules. Prior to this decision, national television broadcast networks were restricted from owning and operating local broadcast stations that would cumulatively reach more than 35 percent of U.S. television households. The FCC rule change increases this limit to 45 percent. In addition, the FCC's order lifted a longstanding restriction on newspapers owning a radio or television station in the same city. I have serious concerns about the implications these regulatory changes will have on the quality and diversity of local programming choices for American consumers. Furthermore, it is my view that the FCC did not provide sufficient time to assess public comment on the matter, and I regret that FCC Chairman Michael Powell did not honor the request of several commissioners to delay the FCC's vote on the rule change.
I am pleased to tell you that I am a cosponsor of S. 1046, the Preservation of Localism, Program Diversity, and Competition in Television Broadcast Service Act of 2003. This legislation would keep the national television ownership rule at 35 percent. On June 19, 2003, S. 1046 was favorably reported by the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. Included in the legislation approved by the committee was an amendment that would also reverse the FCC's decision on the cross-ownership of newspapers, television, and radio stations. You may be assured that I will keep your comments in mind should S. 1046 or related legislation come before the full Senate for consideration.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me about this or any other matter of concern to you in the future.
Thanks for contacting me, in the future please visit my web site at http://sarbanes.senate.gov rather than clicking reply.
Slashdot Mirror
someone recently got a photo from me for a party, took it to the baker where they printed it to a sheet of food dye. They lay that on the cake and it transfers a surprisingly good image into the icing... I think it took a normal-ish printer, though probably special ink and transfer paper
If they actually have something they can do about it (and now that they've screwed up once), they'll be more inclined to send an EVA to go look.
Besides, the accident report did stress that nasa needed to beef up their launch camera systems and their systems that can see the shuttle in orbit, so they will have better ways to tell if there is damage... and after the loss of one shuttle and crew, they'll be a lot more careful to check now...
And NASA will have a bunch of old, junker, partly-disassembled shuttles parked out in the yard too...
pegasus has my vote too.
do any of the other firewalls match it on the security tests like those at grc.com?
and have protection against things (spyware, etc) phoning home?
ok, you win. that's definitely the coolest thing I've seen listed here so far...
Wiley Coyete always bought them from Acme... ;-)
not my favorite browser, thanks.
here's my fav... http://www.mozilla.org/
besides, they'd probably accuse you of a DOS attack and have the FBI raid you. ;-(
they didn't say what movie... maybe it's a *really* short movie... ;-)
This deserves a fine or payment for the extra bandwidth, or cut-off of service, not having your gear confiscated and all the rest of this.
I wonder if the one guy who took it all the way to an aquittal can use that ruling to help the others hit by this. anyone know?
If I were in that area, I'd certainly be calling the ISP or boycotting them based on such behavior. And writing letters to the FBI and representative about such poor law enforcement responses.
You'd think the ISP would be better off to say, "ok, you had it uncapped for X hours/days/weeks. We normally charge Y dollars / hour/day/week, so you get an additional charge of X * Y for the extra bandwidth you used, + a fine of $Z. (all of this specified ahead of time in the contract) Calling the FBI to raid is nuts.
Question: if the limit for the FBI to come in is $250,000 then how can it count to consider 23 separate, unrelated people times X dollars to make that amount? Shouldn't each case be considered separately? If each is estimated at $11,000 'damage' (which seems very high), then shouldn't that number be compared to the 250k limit? What legal justification is there to group them together? (somebody has a buddy at the FBI I think)
Lastly, why is it that computer "crimes", even minor ones, so often end up with so much gear being confiscated, even unrelated gear? Is this really legal? How much luck do people have in getting their data and computers back? It seems like un-due process to take the means for someone's work without better recourse, particularly for such a minor 'crime' as this.
It's not a t-shirt, it's a pair of pants, and the target is on the back...
The True Believer: Can Mike Doyle Do to Microsoft What the Rest of the Computer Industry and the Department of Justice Couldn't Do?
Wonder why MS isn't licensing the patent from Eolas ? Perhaps they think that negociating for that would imply that the patent was valid and they aren't willing to do that yet... maybe they are hoping that public pressure over breaking plugins on thousand (millions?) of sites will make Eolas back down... sounds like lawyer games run amok.
The quotes from the cringley article imply that Eolas may not want to license to MS, in some attempt to change the balance of the browser market. If so, it's pretty annoying/arrogant that a one-person company thinks they know what's best for the internet enough to pull that kind of stunt... The costs of website conversions that shouldn't be necessary could run awfully high.
Wonder if anyone has thought of suing Eolas over the fact that they are screwing up their websites, and costing everyone money to convert away from plugins...?
"... isolates the user from all other sensory input. This in theory means the user is not distracted by other things occurring in their immediate surroundings..." Instead of protecting cell phone users from outside distractions, I want cell phone users to have something that stops them from distracting/annoying others. Maybe we need a portable maxwell-smart-like cone-of-silence that cell-phone users can use when they just *have* to have that (non-) private, loud conversation in a restaurant or other public place... Perhaps a nice big sound-deadening bag. Put it over their head while they make the call. ;-)
Sobig.a and the Spam You Received Today,
Sobig.e - Evolution of the Worm,
and Sobig.f Examined
hmm, good point, perhaps I'm wrong... MS has tremendous talents in the area of writing dumb software... they might succeed in out-dumbing us.
anyone know if this did affect things? any numbers?
I did notice a few weeks ago that the spammers suddenly went to using varied, real-sounding names as their From's so that became a little harder to scan-n-delete...
Yeah, well we may have to worry about computers someday being smarter than humans, but we'll NEVER have to worry about them out-dumbing us... ;-)
Humans Rule in that area!!!!
The other good news from that study is that they show that spam does decrease after you remove your email address from websites... in other words, they don't keep the addresses as much as we generally believe. You aren't on every spammers list forever just because they get your address once.
besides, what makes you think the military hasn't had their own RC spy drones already? They are currently in love with the predator and so forth and they do have projects on helicopter versions, though I think they are generally larger than this...
I don't think it went by the entire US market, but by smaller areas.
From Sarbanes, Md (senator@sarbanes.senate.gov)
Dear Mr. (name removed):
Thank you for contacting me to express your views about media ownership regulations. I share your concerns and appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this important matter.
On June 2, 2003, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted an order modifying media ownership rules. Prior to this decision, national television broadcast networks were restricted from owning and operating local broadcast stations that would cumulatively reach more than 35 percent of U.S. television households. The FCC rule change increases this limit to 45 percent. In addition, the FCC's order lifted a longstanding restriction on newspapers owning a radio or television station in the same city. I have serious concerns about the implications these regulatory changes will have on the quality and diversity of local programming choices for American consumers. Furthermore, it is my view that the FCC did not provide sufficient time to assess public comment on the matter, and I regret that FCC Chairman Michael Powell did not honor the request of several commissioners to delay the FCC's vote on the rule change.
I am pleased to tell you that I am a cosponsor of S. 1046, the Preservation of Localism, Program Diversity, and Competition in Television Broadcast Service Act of 2003. This legislation would keep the national television ownership rule at 35 percent. On June 19, 2003, S. 1046 was favorably reported by the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. Included in the legislation approved by the committee was an amendment that would also reverse the FCC's decision on the cross-ownership of newspapers, television, and radio stations. You may be assured that I will keep your comments in mind should S. 1046 or related legislation come before the full Senate for consideration.
Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me about this or any other matter of concern to you in the future.
Thanks for contacting me, in the future please visit my web site at http://sarbanes.senate.gov rather than clicking reply.
if they are suborbital, ;-)
don't they fall under the law of gravity?
(the ultimate authority in such matters...
Fun With Telemarketers
Anti-telemarketing EGBG counterscript