Do you carry a phone cord with you? Because, as I'm sure you know, not all hotels provide nicely detachable cables with their phones. If you don't, well, I'm surprised. If you do, simply superglue an RJ11USB [USB modem] adapter onto the end of it. Problem solved.
If I had mod points you would get it. Good insight. I've actually had an RJ11 cable in my various laptop bags for the last 8 years, I think I have used it maybe 4 time, the most recent being 3 years ago. I wonder if it is still there come to think of it, I actually haven't had to look for it for quite a while.
Yes, if my sites were BL'd, it might be a little irritating for the half hour or so it would take to set up a relay, but it's not the end of the world...
Works great for you... but not everyone has that ability (or the cash for it). If I'm just running a site off of yahoo's hosting service, do you think that I would know how to set up that relay? Should I know how? For some small companies, it might not be the end of the world but it could be the end of their business. And please don't use the "if they don't know how to do it they shouldn't be on the internet argument. I wish people used that logic for operating cars. What? you don't know how to change out your alternator? well, you shouldn't be driving your car if you cant do something like that.
What if, as it is with me and a couple of friends I know, I'm just a guy who runs his own mail server on his static IP and my ISP gets BLed? What should I do, go get another ISP and set up a relay? How about the email fascists get their act together and not ABUSE THEIR POWER? Let's say my ISP had a spammer on them and it took them 6 hours to find, detect and kick them off, does that mean I should be blacked out for 30 days? Why does the SBL get to take a month to so what they expect an ISP to do in 10 minutes?
Can we stop talking about "replacing Nitrogen with Helium." This is wrong for two reasons. First- it isn't completely replaced as people keep implying- Helium is added to Nitrogen and Oxygen forming Trimix. It would be hard to call it Trimix if you didn't have all three. Second- The Helium replaces the Oxygen not the damned Nitrogen. The point is to get rid of the Oxygen which becomes more and more toxic the deeper you go. Nitrogen is still there.
Two things: in trimix helium replaces both some of the oxygen and some of the nitrogen (to reduce the risk of nitrogen narcosis); there also a mix called heliox (helium + oxygen) and in that case, all of the nitrogen and some of the oxygen is replaced by helium.
Interesting. Does this mean if you've just had five shots immediately before taking the breathalyzer, you will test negative (since there hasn't been enough time to metabolize the alcohol?)
Could be, but then you also would not be drunk yet (it does take time for the alcohol to make you drunk). If you were making a really short trip you might be doing it perfectly legally and sober.
Yeah, try telling that to the Toyota dealer when you go buy a Prius--or his smiling mechanic when you bring it in for repair.
I've seen lots of people make comments like this but without ever backing them up with even anecdotal evidence. Do you have any? Hybrid cars are marginally more complex than normal cars, but not as much as you would think. All cars have electrical systems, all cars have electric motors and alternators/generators. Actually the Toyota hybrid's CVT transmission is much simpler than the a normal gas engine transmission. Again, any facts to back up this supposed maintenance nightmare?
I would say your argument is as least as much of a strawman as the article, if not more so...
I use windows XP all day long...I'm hooked up on the internet and surf and download and blah blah blah all day long. Not once have I been hit with a virus or a trojan or an email attack.
Working in a small office (4 PCs, 4 macs, 5 Linux servers) I have seen a couple of email virus and some nasty adware program that kept changing users home pages, even when we have had updated virus software. We have a firewall here, but that can't stop up all of the holes in IE.
When I have been visiting customers (a VERY large pharma) I saw their IT turn off the network connections to entire campuses because of email born viruses passing through Outlook. If you haven't seen or experienced any of this, you are very lucky, and seeing that you read slashdot I have a hard time believing you don't think Windows has serious security problems
I run virus checkers, adware checking...am behind a hardware router/firewall. Basically the same thing I would be running on OSX also. I don't even think about it and just get on with my day.
That is not quite true, if you were running OSX you would not need the Adware Checker, the hardware router/firewall would only be needed if you need the routing function and don't want to leave on your computer to do the routing for you (both firewall and routing are built in and easy to setup on OSX, just look in the system preferences app). There are virus checkers but they are (currently) superfluous, I don't run one and have never seen an OSX virus or heard of one in the any where wild. The only ones that I have read about were either theoretical or made as an example and not 'wild'.
And OSX doesn't have any of this? Linux doesn't either? Sorry, you use a modern OS you'll have upgrades/patches/downtime from time to time.
I think you are missing his point: the windows patches are much more needed and change quite a bit more of the OS and break many more things. I have dealt with way more broken apps at the office on a recently patched XP machine than an OSX machine here. All OS's do require patching, which I do grant you undermines his point a bit, but the patches on XP seem to have way more nasty side effects than on OSX.
I don't choose something because something else sucks. I go with something because that something is right for me. It's like this last Presidential election. Many people voted for one candidate only because they didn't like the other one. They didn't vote for the person because they liked him or believed in him...only because they didn't like the other guy. WTF is that?
That is usually called "the lesser of two evils". If I don't like A, then I'm going to stop using A and see if B is better because quite a few other people that have had my problems really seem to think so. Not always foolproof.
Despite not being a politically open country, China isn't famous (like the USSR was) for covering up uncomfortable news from one's superiors; it is famous for covering it up from the public.
I beg to differ, China has a long history of this. During the Chinese famine of 1958-1961 underling were afraid to report to superiors the problems with the bad farming techniques that Mao was mandating, and people who did report problems to superiors were kicked out of the government.
More recently (~1999) it was found out that the local Chinese governments were over-reporting to Beijing their fish catches. Those are just two that I could think of off the top of my head, but they do show a track record for not being open with their superiors.
The second-hand diamond market is nearly nonexistant. If you don't believe me, go to your local pawn shop and see how much they'll give you for a diamond ring.
Where can I go to get a second-hand diamond? Sounds like a way to save a boundle. Cheaper than man made.
Yeah, beheading someone with a laser sword is very civilized. You have the honour of watching someone die while covered in their blood. It's so civilized, indeed.
Not covered in blood - the light saber should cauterize the wound. Very civilized.
1) Grab every single copy of your free paper that they can find, or 2) Just buy one copy and then use their own massive printing presses to reproduce the article, along with all the ads on the page, giving full credit to your paper as being the original source of the article.
Option two is flawed too. The free newspaper's ad revenue is based on circulation, so option one, while not feasible, is the 'correct' one, while option two is not. With option one their revenue would go up because it increases their circulation. This is of course ignoring what would actually happen: NYT would buy the article from the free paper.
You could argue that the Internet is a different ballgame, because advertising revenue is based strictly on the number of hits to your site, but it's only that way because the advertisers have chosen to structure it that way. Caching is a painfully obvious way to improve the Internet, and it just makes sense. If advertisers can't find a way to adapt to it, well, they suck. Advertisers shouldn't restrict the advancement of technology just because it doesn't fit their model, especially when it's something that's such an obvious solution to such an obvious problem.
While your sentiments are good, you are ignoring the most important person: the content provider. They should be given the option, and they should also have the option to opt in to caching or to not. It is not our place to go them and say: I am going to link to my own copy of your article, tough luck if you loose out on the ad money that your content should be creating.
But there's a critical difference. If you publish your book on the web, then you've already given out free copies of the book to the whole world. What people do with it from there is beyond your control. Besides, even Internet Exploder keeps cached copies of pages. You could argue that Microsoft is depriving sites of the hits they deserve. The bottom line is that once you post your "content" on the web, the cat is out of the bag. Google can cache it, IE can cache it, so why can't Slashdot cache it?
It is not quite given out for free - web sites are more like those free newspapers that rely on advertising revenue. Is it OK to clip and reproduce articles from them? I'm not too sure myself on the Google cache and quite a few people are complaining about that very issue. IE's caching is entirely different though: IE only caches a page when each user views it. An IE cached pages does not mask 10,000 other views. Most (I would hope all) advertising modules take that into account.
...because all those hits are coming from Slashdot users. In other words, the site wouldn't even get those hits if not for Slashdot. So if Slashdot chooses to cache the page for its own users, how can the owner of the site complain?
I'm not sure that I can agree with this logic. If I write a book and the NY Review of Books reviews it should they be able to give out free versions of the book? Should I not get any revenue from any of the sales that get generated by that review?
The only reason Slashdot is pointing to their site is that they have some (hopefully) interesting content that they put some effort into assembling. Why should they not get compensated for that? I know it gets abused by some submitters but they should not be the bad apple that ruins the whole barrel for the rest of the submitters.
OTOH, by having people go to mirrordot after the site goes down they can be assured that they got the maximum number of hits that they can handle (and therefor the maximum amount of ad revenue that you could at the time) before people starting viewing the mirrors and bypassing the ads. Flawed I know, but it should not be ignored.
How is this a problem, exactly? A settlement is just that... a settlement. That means that the plaintifs are happy with the amount of money that MS is giving them to walk away without a lawsuit (which probably would be won, considering the amount of money MS is willing to pay.. That's how the system works.
If I had a startup, and I had a product that MS infringed would I A. Want to fight them, and take my chances with a startup, eating Ramen Noodles for several years, and living in my car with the *hope* that *maybe* I'd hit it big or B. Settle with MS for a lump sum? Hmmm.... tough one.
It is a problem if they make it their SOP rather than just licensing the technology in the first place. I would rather have them do that, then the lawyers don't get a slice of the pie. Also keep in mind the plaintiff is not always happy with the settlement the court came up with.
HAHA a G4? Running OSX? AFAIK there is no OS on the planet that can handle reading more partition table formats and handle more actual filesystems than Linux. Also, bad hard drives sometimes kill computers, I have had it happen to me personally. It would be best to use the oldest PCI-bus system you have for this particular task, so if you kill it, you aren't sad when you throw it in the bin.
Did you read your parent? As they are only using this to reformat with multiple writes it doesn't need to read or write any particular filesystem, it only needs to be able to write over the entire disk, and the disk utility in OSX makes it very easy.
The vast majority of spam that I get is targeted at Americans, and hence completely irrelevent to me.
For a while 80% of the spam that I got (admittedly not a lot relative to other people) was Korean and Chinese, I have no idea how or why they got my email address.
Re:The myth is dead! Long live the myth!
on
The Solar Death Ray
·
· Score: 1, Funny
A Greek scientist, Dr. ioannis Sakkas, curious about whether Archimedes could really have used a "burning glass" to destroy the Roman fleet in 212 BC lined up nearly 60 Greek sailors, each holding an oblong mirror tipped to catch the Sun's rays and direct them at a wooden ship 160 feet away. The ship caught fire at once.....Sakkas said after the experiment there was no doubt in his mind the great inventor could have used bronze mirrors to scuttle the Romans
Does Dr. Ioannis Sakkas work for NBC's nightline by chance?
> I don't get it? did anything bad happen to the > Mac? what you're saying is that using non-Mac > products can get you owned? What I am saying is that this guy assumed because he used Mac products, he was invulnerable. > yes setting up a wireless network was maybe > a bit stupid given such poor company security, > but with that kind of bad IT administration > something was bound to happen sooner or later. Try running a dozen remote offices in shipyards across the US with only 2 IT people. And no travel expenses. They didn't expect wireless to enter into the equasion, and it wasn't until they hired me as a temp to fix it that they were aware a wireless access pint had been put in at all. It took their DSL company to say they were spouting spam to hire me for the case. > I hope you took the hint and moved everyone > to Mac/linux. no? "fool me once, shame on > you..." The day that Peachtree and PCMiler can run on Linux, call me. But in this case, I was just a contractor with no lasting value (not that I wouldn't work for them again, but I was only a temp to hired clean up the place with their permenant IT people).
In all probability, the anti-virus people are not targeting consumers who (for example) choose passwords wisely and make sure that nonessential network services aren't running and don't start up automatically.
They're targeting consumers who have little motivation to understand much more than "point-and-click". That being the case, I don't think the article is necessarily an instance of FUD-spreading.
Last I checked all nonessential network services do not start up automatically on under OS X.
Slashdot Mirror
If I had mod points you would get it. Good insight. I've actually had an RJ11 cable in my various laptop bags for the last 8 years, I think I have used it maybe 4 time, the most recent being 3 years ago. I wonder if it is still there come to think of it, I actually haven't had to look for it for quite a while.
Works great for you... but not everyone has that ability (or the cash for it). If I'm just running a site off of yahoo's hosting service, do you think that I would know how to set up that relay? Should I know how? For some small companies, it might not be the end of the world but it could be the end of their business. And please don't use the "if they don't know how to do it they shouldn't be on the internet argument. I wish people used that logic for operating cars. What? you don't know how to change out your alternator? well, you shouldn't be driving your car if you cant do something like that.
What if, as it is with me and a couple of friends I know, I'm just a guy who runs his own mail server on his static IP and my ISP gets BLed? What should I do, go get another ISP and set up a relay? How about the email fascists get their act together and not ABUSE THEIR POWER? Let's say my ISP had a spammer on them and it took them 6 hours to find, detect and kick them off, does that mean I should be blacked out for 30 days? Why does the SBL get to take a month to so what they expect an ISP to do in 10 minutes?
IIRC they were leaving the watermarks on the images.
Two things: in trimix helium replaces both some of the oxygen and some of the nitrogen (to reduce the risk of nitrogen narcosis); there also a mix called heliox (helium + oxygen) and in that case, all of the nitrogen and some of the oxygen is replaced by helium.
Could be, but then you also would not be drunk yet (it does take time for the alcohol to make you drunk). If you were making a really short trip you might be doing it perfectly legally and sober.
What about random check points? No probable cause there. They are illegal in some states, but not in all.
2) even if they ask you to take a breath test, you can refuse.
3) in some states there can be consequences for refusing to take the test.
Once again, driving does not cause you to surrender your rights.
If there are consequences, doesn't that mean you have given up rights?
If recent history is any indication, no they won't check the file before they sue.
I've seen lots of people make comments like this but without ever backing them up with even anecdotal evidence. Do you have any? Hybrid cars are marginally more complex than normal cars, but not as much as you would think. All cars have electrical systems, all cars have electric motors and alternators/generators. Actually the Toyota hybrid's CVT transmission is much simpler than the a normal gas engine transmission. Again, any facts to back up this supposed maintenance nightmare?
I use windows XP all day long...I'm hooked up on the internet and surf and download and blah blah blah all day long. Not once have I been hit with a virus or a trojan or an email attack.
Working in a small office (4 PCs, 4 macs, 5 Linux servers) I have seen a couple of email virus and some nasty adware program that kept changing users home pages, even when we have had updated virus software. We have a firewall here, but that can't stop up all of the holes in IE.
When I have been visiting customers (a VERY large pharma) I saw their IT turn off the network connections to entire campuses because of email born viruses passing through Outlook. If you haven't seen or experienced any of this, you are very lucky, and seeing that you read slashdot I have a hard time believing you don't think Windows has serious security problems
I run virus checkers, adware checking...am behind a hardware router/firewall. Basically the same thing I would be running on OSX also. I don't even think about it and just get on with my day.
That is not quite true, if you were running OSX you would not need the Adware Checker, the hardware router/firewall would only be needed if you need the routing function and don't want to leave on your computer to do the routing for you (both firewall and routing are built in and easy to setup on OSX, just look in the system preferences app). There are virus checkers but they are (currently) superfluous, I don't run one and have never seen an OSX virus or heard of one in the any where wild. The only ones that I have read about were either theoretical or made as an example and not 'wild'.
And OSX doesn't have any of this? Linux doesn't either? Sorry, you use a modern OS you'll have upgrades/patches/downtime from time to time.
I think you are missing his point: the windows patches are much more needed and change quite a bit more of the OS and break many more things. I have dealt with way more broken apps at the office on a recently patched XP machine than an OSX machine here. All OS's do require patching, which I do grant you undermines his point a bit, but the patches on XP seem to have way more nasty side effects than on OSX.
I don't choose something because something else sucks. I go with something because that something is right for me. It's like this last Presidential election. Many people voted for one candidate only because they didn't like the other one. They didn't vote for the person because they liked him or believed in him...only because they didn't like the other guy. WTF is that?
That is usually called "the lesser of two evils". If I don't like A, then I'm going to stop using A and see if B is better because quite a few other people that have had my problems really seem to think so. Not always foolproof.
I beg to differ, China has a long history of this. During the Chinese famine of 1958-1961 underling were afraid to report to superiors the problems with the bad farming techniques that Mao was mandating, and people who did report problems to superiors were kicked out of the government.
More recently (~1999) it was found out that the local Chinese governments were over-reporting to Beijing their fish catches. Those are just two that I could think of off the top of my head, but they do show a track record for not being open with their superiors.
The Vatican outsources their police and military to the Swiss.
Where can I go to get a second-hand diamond? Sounds like a way to save a boundle. Cheaper than man made.
Not covered in blood - the light saber should cauterize the wound. Very civilized.
Option two is flawed too. The free newspaper's ad revenue is based on circulation, so option one, while not feasible, is the 'correct' one, while option two is not. With option one their revenue would go up because it increases their circulation. This is of course ignoring what would actually happen: NYT would buy the article from the free paper.
You could argue that the Internet is a different ballgame, because advertising revenue is based strictly on the number of hits to your site, but it's only that way because the advertisers have chosen to structure it that way. Caching is a painfully obvious way to improve the Internet, and it just makes sense. If advertisers can't find a way to adapt to it, well, they suck. Advertisers shouldn't restrict the advancement of technology just because it doesn't fit their model, especially when it's something that's such an obvious solution to such an obvious problem.
While your sentiments are good, you are ignoring the most important person: the content provider. They should be given the option, and they should also have the option to opt in to caching or to not. It is not our place to go them and say: I am going to link to my own copy of your article, tough luck if you loose out on the ad money that your content should be creating.
It is not quite given out for free - web sites are more like those free newspapers that rely on advertising revenue. Is it OK to clip and reproduce articles from them? I'm not too sure myself on the Google cache and quite a few people are complaining about that very issue. IE's caching is entirely different though: IE only caches a page when each user views it. An IE cached pages does not mask 10,000 other views. Most (I would hope all) advertising modules take that into account.
I'm not sure that I can agree with this logic. If I write a book and the NY Review of Books reviews it should they be able to give out free versions of the book? Should I not get any revenue from any of the sales that get generated by that review?
The only reason Slashdot is pointing to their site is that they have some (hopefully) interesting content that they put some effort into assembling. Why should they not get compensated for that? I know it gets abused by some submitters but they should not be the bad apple that ruins the whole barrel for the rest of the submitters.
OTOH, by having people go to mirrordot after the site goes down they can be assured that they got the maximum number of hits that they can handle (and therefor the maximum amount of ad revenue that you could at the time) before people starting viewing the mirrors and bypassing the ads. Flawed I know, but it should not be ignored.
Fantastic, just one more thing to add:
Fox broadcasts some shows in SD widescreen IIRC (looks like a clean DVD on my widescreen TV).
If I had a startup, and I had a product that MS infringed would I A. Want to fight them, and take my chances with a startup, eating Ramen Noodles for several years, and living in my car with the *hope* that *maybe* I'd hit it big or B. Settle with MS for a lump sum? Hmmm.... tough one.
It is a problem if they make it their SOP rather than just licensing the technology in the first place. I would rather have them do that, then the lawyers don't get a slice of the pie. Also keep in mind the plaintiff is not always happy with the settlement the court came up with.
Did you read your parent? As they are only using this to reformat with multiple writes it doesn't need to read or write any particular filesystem, it only needs to be able to write over the entire disk, and the disk utility in OSX makes it very easy.
I once woke at the crack of dawn, then I realized I was looking west.
The vast majority of spam that I get is targeted at Americans, and hence completely irrelevent to me. For a while 80% of the spam that I got (admittedly not a lot relative to other people) was Korean and Chinese, I have no idea how or why they got my email address.
Does Dr. Ioannis Sakkas work for NBC's nightline by chance?
Preview man, preview.
They're targeting consumers who have little motivation to understand much more than "point-and-click". That being the case, I don't think the article is necessarily an instance of FUD-spreading.
Last I checked all nonessential network services do not start up automatically on under OS X.