Excuse my lack of experience in this area (Last time I ran a mail server was over a decade ago and was all POP3/SMTP, but can someone clue me on what IMAP offers that POP3 does not?
Sounds like it must be better, but I haven't the slightest idea what.
As an ex-owner/chief architect of the first cable modem network in Nebraska (Doesn't that sound like an oxymoron?:) ), I do not believe or support the idea that any internet provider has the right to modify any data packet transmitted over their network by their paying customer. Sure they have the right to modify their own data any way they want, but they most certainly do not have the right to modify data belonging to their customers.
The only thing I think they have the right to do is throttle the amount of upstream bandwidth available to a customer. I always did that, I don't think any ISP could afford the upstream bandwidth that would be needed if each cable modem on the network uploaded at full speed all the time. That's why almost all consumer-grade data connections download a lot faster than they upload.
If the router accepts the packet of data from the customer for upstream delivery, then the ISP should do it's best to make sure that data is delivered upstream. (The basics of TCP/IP do not promise delivery)
But looking at the payload of that packet in order to make a determination on whether to deliver that packet regardless of available bandwidth? That just seems like a good way to piss off your users and not put yourself in a legally actionable position. If there was sufficient competition in the broadband arena (Which there isn't, a large amount of broadband customers have only one provider to choose from, two if they're lucky. Which totally screws any chance of these theoretical 'market forces' from working as those 'free market' folks blabber on about all the time.) then it would quickly drive customers to other providers.
As far as the unlimited with bandwidth caps, that's pragmatically the way it's always been and always will be. Any ISP that provides symmetrical broadband access for less than $1000/month is going to be out of business in a hurry. It's unlimited in the sense that you can remain connected at all times. It's unlimited in standard web surfing/email activity you can do is just fine. Surf the net 24 hours a day and actually read each page you request, and you'll not find an ISP out there that has a problem with it. But the people out there that think it's acceptable "normal use" to attempt to upload many terabytes per month over their cable modem are going to find that they get an upstream cap pretty quick, or have a really slow (read none) connection to the internet when the ISP goes out of business because they either cannot afford their bandwidth bills or lose all their other customers cause of the one punk with his "it's all about ME!!" attitude wrecked it for everyone else.
Now we can debate the meaning of the term "unlimited" all day long, but when it comes to the reality of things, everyone knows that it's a shared resource that only works through economies of scale, not that you have a "modem of infinite bandwidth" at your disposal. If you are self-deluded enough to believe that, you're stupid and need to go read about The Tragedy of the Commons - a nice story about how it only takes a few dumbasses who don't grok any difference between 'infinite' and 'finite' to wreck a great shared resource. Nothing's infinite, and nothing's free.
Oh yah, well the ABC song is a direct rip off of "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" with no attribution. Children across the world should immediately cease and desist from singing that song.
This guy has apparently NEVER read a comic book! Weird. I'm no comic nerd, and probably haven't looked at one in a decade, but even I caught the "BLAM" reference and totally understood it. Very weird.
Maybe this is why there's been so much news about solid-state hard drives the last couple weeks. Solid state pretty much negates any use for this patent. Bye bye spinning disks.
Note that in the filing they name the products as "RedHat Linux", and for the two Novell products, they spell it "Linex". Almost like they are giving Novell a way out on a legal technicality. People have gotten out of speeding tickets over a mispelled name before, so why not here?
"I'm sorry your honor, but we do not produce a product called Linex. We do however have a product called Linux"
Thanks, but I meant I was confused by these points made:
- dog slow bloated - pushes forward MS codecs and respects patens - very unstable (makes windows look stable) - binary-only extremely insecure (makes windows look secure)
So it this guy saying that Linux is very unstable and makes Windows look stable? That Linux is Binary only extremely insecure (huh?) and makes Windows look secure? (Double-huh?)
Curious how you got Hibernate to work with 4 GB RAM. Are you running XP x64 or Vista x64?
If I drop my XP x64 box to 2 GB, then Hibernate works just fine. When I put it back up to 4 GB then the option isn't available. (The tab doesn't even appear under Power Management.)
"I know little to nothing about programming but would like to start, fund, and maintain a GPL linux POS application."
How many people out there just cannot wait to try out this code once it's finished?;)
Sorry dude, but that's about the most self-contradictory statement I've ever read. "I don't know anything about creating cash registers, but I want to build a cash register without any knowledge about how one works."
That sets off one of the primary precursor flags for "How to recognize a failed project".
Why should someone have to install a plug-in to disable BASE FUNCTIONALITY? Shouldn't that be part of the base code?
What if someone has an issue with this information being transmitted? What if WP transmits the info before they are able to install the plug-in?
Guys, the issue here is not what info is being sent, it's that the information is being transmitted without asking for permission of the person running WP.
However, one of the best points brought up in the mailing list about what info is being sent is that someone now has the possibility of finding a sploit for a certain version of a WP plug-in, and can now obtain a list of all people (and their URL) running that version. (Think about that for a minute, scary!)
Matt's weak argument is that if everyone runs the latest version of WP and all plug-ins, there will be no insecure code out there. Uh huh, yah right. There's no zero-day exploits? There's no bugs that exist that are not known by the developers? There's nobody out there who makes money off finding these undisclosed bugs and then selling information about this bugs to the highest bidder?
Someone finds such a bug, gets a list of every WP site running a version with that vulnerability, and sells that to some malicious group, who then turns around and defaces a whole slew of WP sites overnight using this vulnerability. Guess how weak Matt's argument is going to look then? (And this is only one imagined scenario, there's probably several others.)
I don't use WP, but I definitely will not be in the future now that I've seen this nonchalant attitude towards anyone using their software.
They now are in the process of learning a lesson. Wonder how long it will take?
Slashdot Mirror
6. Profit!!!
Excuse my lack of experience in this area (Last time I ran a mail server was over a decade ago and was all POP3/SMTP, but can someone clue me on what IMAP offers that POP3 does not?
Sounds like it must be better, but I haven't the slightest idea what.
As an ex-owner/chief architect of the first cable modem network in Nebraska (Doesn't that sound like an oxymoron? :) ), I do not believe or support the idea that any internet provider has the right to modify any data packet transmitted over their network by their paying customer. Sure they have the right to modify their own data any way they want, but they most certainly do not have the right to modify data belonging to their customers.
The only thing I think they have the right to do is throttle the amount of upstream bandwidth available to a customer. I always did that, I don't think any ISP could afford the upstream bandwidth that would be needed if each cable modem on the network uploaded at full speed all the time. That's why almost all consumer-grade data connections download a lot faster than they upload.
If the router accepts the packet of data from the customer for upstream delivery, then the ISP should do it's best to make sure that data is delivered upstream. (The basics of TCP/IP do not promise delivery)
But looking at the payload of that packet in order to make a determination on whether to deliver that packet regardless of available bandwidth? That just seems like a good way to piss off your users and not put yourself in a legally actionable position. If there was sufficient competition in the broadband arena (Which there isn't, a large amount of broadband customers have only one provider to choose from, two if they're lucky. Which totally screws any chance of these theoretical 'market forces' from working as those 'free market' folks blabber on about all the time.) then it would quickly drive customers to other providers.
As far as the unlimited with bandwidth caps, that's pragmatically the way it's always been and always will be. Any ISP that provides symmetrical broadband access for less than $1000/month is going to be out of business in a hurry. It's unlimited in the sense that you can remain connected at all times. It's unlimited in standard web surfing/email activity you can do is just fine. Surf the net 24 hours a day and actually read each page you request, and you'll not find an ISP out there that has a problem with it. But the people out there that think it's acceptable "normal use" to attempt to upload many terabytes per month over their cable modem are going to find that they get an upstream cap pretty quick, or have a really slow (read none) connection to the internet when the ISP goes out of business because they either cannot afford their bandwidth bills or lose all their other customers cause of the one punk with his "it's all about ME!!" attitude wrecked it for everyone else.
Now we can debate the meaning of the term "unlimited" all day long, but when it comes to the reality of things, everyone knows that it's a shared resource that only works through economies of scale, not that you have a "modem of infinite bandwidth" at your disposal. If you are self-deluded enough to believe that, you're stupid and need to go read about The Tragedy of the Commons - a nice story about how it only takes a few dumbasses who don't grok any difference between 'infinite' and 'finite' to wreck a great shared resource. Nothing's infinite, and nothing's free.
Oh yah, well the ABC song is a direct rip off of "Twinkle Twinkle Little Star" with no attribution. Children across the world should immediately cease and desist from singing that song.
Arre youu fuckingg withh mee, Brendonn?
14,600K is 16,385.
Just kidding, don't do the math.
(Although I actually just did thinking "Am I on to something?" Darn!)
Give me >head<
;)
<Ooops!>
(No hidden meanings there!)
Are you done yet? Every five posts it's you saying the same damn thing over and over. Say something new or STFU.
The horse is dead, you killed it.
Don't forget Garth Brooks' rock album: Garth Brooks In The Life of Chris Gaines. I dunno how well it sold, but he did do a rock album.
The picture on the cover is pretty surprising - You end up saying "THAT'S Garth Brooks??" WTF?
I'm a metalhead, but I do have to say I liked "Thunder Rolls", that was really a good song.
This guy has apparently NEVER read a comic book! Weird. I'm no comic nerd, and probably haven't looked at one in a decade, but even I caught the "BLAM" reference and totally understood it. Very weird.
Maybe this is why there's been so much news about solid-state hard drives the last couple weeks. Solid state pretty much negates any use for this patent. Bye bye spinning disks.
Not sure how to parse the meaning of the first sentence without knowing if you are against, or in favor of, dropping a nuke on Iran or Syria.
But I'd say Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul would do a far better job. Al Gore certainly would have done a better job.
Note that in the filing they name the products as "RedHat Linux", and for the two Novell products, they spell it "Linex". Almost like they are giving Novell a way out on a legal technicality. People have gotten out of speeding tickets over a mispelled name before, so why not here?
"I'm sorry your honor, but we do not produce a product called Linex. We do however have a product called Linux"
"Case dismissed!"
That's a good name for it!
Thanks, but I meant I was confused by these points made:
- dog slow bloated
- pushes forward MS codecs and respects patens
- very unstable (makes windows look stable)
- binary-only extremely insecure (makes windows look secure)
So it this guy saying that Linux is very unstable and makes Windows look stable? That Linux is Binary only extremely insecure (huh?) and makes Windows look secure? (Double-huh?)
You're STILL sticking up for that fucking Bush guy even after all these years? What are you, some kind of a retard? Are you a Banana Republican?
What? Can someone translate that for me?
Curious how you got Hibernate to work with 4 GB RAM. Are you running XP x64 or Vista x64?
If I drop my XP x64 box to 2 GB, then Hibernate works just fine. When I put it back up to 4 GB then the option isn't available. (The tab doesn't even appear under Power Management.)
If you could clue me I'd really appreciate it!
Wow, I had no idea. Thanks for the info!
:)
Here's a link to the PoR module:
http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=Modules.Detail&id=1706
I'll have to try this out tonight.
> "Variable and path" in HTML? What are you talking about?
Swap "Filename and path" for "Variable and path" and you will glean enlightenment.
You ate a big man in your car? Impressive!
I thought it was the little Bush who cried wolf. :)
"I know little to nothing about programming but would like to start, fund, and maintain a GPL linux POS application."
;)
How many people out there just cannot wait to try out this code once it's finished?
Sorry dude, but that's about the most self-contradictory statement I've ever read. "I don't know anything about creating cash registers, but I want to build a cash register without any knowledge about how one works."
That sets off one of the primary precursor flags for "How to recognize a failed project".
What list? Where is it?
:)
Damn, I hate when I forget to include what I was discussing. (Yah, I do it too!)
Why should someone have to install a plug-in to disable BASE FUNCTIONALITY? Shouldn't that be part of the base code?
What if someone has an issue with this information being transmitted? What if WP transmits the info before they are able to install the plug-in?
Guys, the issue here is not what info is being sent, it's that the information is being transmitted without asking for permission of the person running WP.
However, one of the best points brought up in the mailing list about what info is being sent is that someone now has the possibility of finding a sploit for a certain version of a WP plug-in, and can now obtain a list of all people (and their URL) running that version. (Think about that for a minute, scary!)
Matt's weak argument is that if everyone runs the latest version of WP and all plug-ins, there will be no insecure code out there. Uh huh, yah right. There's no zero-day exploits? There's no bugs that exist that are not known by the developers? There's nobody out there who makes money off finding these undisclosed bugs and then selling information about this bugs to the highest bidder?
Someone finds such a bug, gets a list of every WP site running a version with that vulnerability, and sells that to some malicious group, who then turns around and defaces a whole slew of WP sites overnight using this vulnerability. Guess how weak Matt's argument is going to look then? (And this is only one imagined scenario, there's probably several others.)
I don't use WP, but I definitely will not be in the future now that I've seen this nonchalant attitude towards anyone using their software.
They now are in the process of learning a lesson. Wonder how long it will take?